Hicks Equipment Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 7, 1950

90 N.L.R.B. 141 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of HICKS EQUIPMENT COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTER-
NATIONAL UNION, UNITED AUTOMOBILE , AIRCRAFT AND AGRICULTURAL-
IMPLEMENT WORKERS ' OF AMERICA , CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 34-RC-173.-Decided June 7,1950
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before John K. Pickens, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three -member
panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Styles].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in buying, reconditioning, and selling
used Ford motors and other automobile parts at Charlotte, North Caro-
lina. A provision of an agreement between the Employer and Ford
Motor Company provides that the Employer maintain an adequate
stock of reconditioned parts to supply the needs of certain North Caro-
lina Ford dealers. The agreement contains no franchise or agency
and covers no specified geographical territory. The Employer oper-
ates within a radius of 150 miles in and about Charlotte, North Caro-
lina, all within the State of -North- Carolina. The Employer pur-
chases old motors from Ford dealers and salvage operators in North.
Carolina. Its reconditioning is conducted on an exchange basis, the
dealer exchanging in old motor for each reconditioned inotor.
During the year ending July 31, 1049, the Employer purchased raw
materials valued at over $466,000, approximately 10 percent of which
was purchased outside the State of North Carolina. Of the $419,000
spent for purchases within the State, approximately $150,000 was spent
for the purchase of new automobile parts, 90 percent of which, was
Ford parts. Of these Ford parts, approximately 75 percent was ob-
tained from Ford Motor Company Depot at Charlotte, and 25 percent
was ordered through local Ford dealers in Charlotte. All parts pur-
I The Employer ' s motion . to correct the transcript of the record in certain particulars set
forth in the motion, to which the Petitioner makes no objection , is granted . The transcript
-is deemed corrected in accordance therewith.
90 NLRB No. 30.
141
142 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
chased from Ford Motor Company Depot at Charlotte are obtained
by the Depot from vendors throughout the United States. There is
no Ford Motor manufacturing plant in North Carolina. The remain-
ing $268,000 for purchases was expended for old motors and parts,
obtained from local Ford dealers and salvage operators. Among its
out-of-State purchases, valued at approximately $47,000, the Em-
ployer bought cleaning and grinding materials, carburetor parts and
gaskets, and generator and starter parts direct from out-of-State
vendors. The Employer also received direct shipments of parts in
small amounts, by parcel post or express, from Ford Motor Company
at Dearborn, Michigan.
During the same period, the Employer sold finished products,
valued in excess of $530,000, the entire amount of which was sold
within the State of North Carolina.
The Employer has approximately six competitors in North Carolina
who are engaged in reconditioning motors. The Employer does not
sell new or used automobiles, gas, oil, tires, or other accessories. It
sells for cash or on credit, and does its own financing. It does not
recondition bus or truck motors for any large manufacturing or
transportation companies in the area.
The Employer contends that its operations are essentially local in
character, that they do not affect commerce within the-meaning of the
Act, and that, iii any event, the Board should not assert jurisdiction
in this case. Although we do not agree that the Employer's business
does not affect commerce, we agree that the operations of the Em-
ployer are essentially local in character, and that it would not effectu-
ate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case.2 Accord-
ingly, we shall dismiss the petition herein.
ORDER
On the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire
.record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders
that the petition for investigation and certification of representatives
of employees of Hicks Equipment Company, Charlotte, North Caro-
lina, filed herein by International Union,. United Automobile, Aircraft
and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, CIO, be, and it
hereby is, dismissed.
1H. L. Boniface, d/b/a/ Motor Replacement Company, 82 NLRB 690 ; and Philip N.
Koritzky, d/b/a/ Bangor Auto Body Shop, 82 NLRB 688; cf. The Fuller Automobile Com-
pany, d/b/a The Fuller Automobile Company and Fuller Manufacturing & Supply Company
88 NLRB 1452; Lawrence Hollbrook, et al., 80 NLRB 679.