International Idlewild Catering Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 16, 1954

110 N.L.R.B. 1639 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

INTERNATIONAL IDLEWILD CATERING CORP. 1639
INTERNATIONAL IDLEWILD CATERING CORP. and INTERNATIONAL Asso-
CIATION OF MACHINISTS , AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. Oi-RC- 985.
Deoember 16, 195.
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Thomas H. Weddington,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer, a New York corporation, is principally engaged
in the business of operating a public restaurant at the International
Idlewild Airport, Long Island, New York. The Employer is a
wholly owned subsidiary of The Brass Rail Inc., another New York
corporation, which is also principally engaged in the public restau-
rant business. The Brass Rail Inc. owns and operates several restau-
rants in the New York City area. The Brass Rail Inc. formulates all
policy for the Employer and, from a central office, controls all labor
relation matters, including the hiring and discharge of employees.
In such circumstances we find that the Employer and The Brass Rail
Inc., operating as an intrastate chain of public restaurants, constitute
a single Employer within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act.
In 1953, The Brass Rail Inc. made purchases directly or indirectly
from out of the State, amounting to at least $2,000,000. We have, in
a companion case, asserted jurisdiction over The Brass Rail, Inc.,'
holding these purchases to be the equivalent of an indirect inflow of
$2,000,000. Accordingly, we find that the Employer is engaged in
commerce within the meaning of the Act, and that it will effectuate
the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.'
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The parties agree that a unit of all drivers and helpers employed
by the Employer at Idlewild International Airport, Long Island,
New York, excluding office clerical and professional employees, watch-
men, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act, is appropriate.
The parties disagree as to the inclusion of lead drivers. The Peti-
The Brass Rail Inc., 110 NLRB No. 255.
n See Bick/ord's, Inc., 110 NLRB No . 252. Although Members Murdock and Peterson
dissented from the adoption of the new restrictive standard for public restaurants in that
case, they deem themselves bound to apply that standard in this case . See also J. R.
Knott and Hugh H . Hogue d/ b/a Hogue and Knott Supermarkets , 110 NLRB 543, pp
544-545.
110 NLRB No. 257.
1640 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tioner contends that their duties are supervisory in nature and that
they should be excluded from the unit, whereas the Employer con-
tends that they are nonsupervisory and should be included.
At the hearing the Petitioner introduced no evidence to support its
contention in regard to the lead drivers. The Employer however
introduced detailed testimony to the effect that although the lead
drivers receive overtime work preference and are more experienced
than the other drivers, they perform only routine delivery duties in
conformance with a checklist prepared for them by the front office;
that they have no power to hire, discharge, direct, discipline, or trans-
fer, or to recommend such actions with respect to their fellow em-
ployees; and, in sum, that the lead drivers have no supervisory powers
whatsoever. In view of this uncontradicted testimony we find that
the duties of the lead drivers are not supervisory in nature and that
they may properly be included in the unit.
Accordingly, we find that all drivers and helpers employed by the
Employer at the Idlewild Airport, Long Island, New York, including
lead drivers, but excluding office clerical and professional employees,
watchmen, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from pi ] i'cation. J
AMERICAN CAN COMPANY and CARPENTERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL OF ST.
Louis, AFFILIATED WITH THE UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS
AND JOINERS OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 1l -RC-2396.
December .16,195.E
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon it petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Harold B. Norman and
William F. Trent, hearing officers.' The hearing officers' rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees
of the Employer.'
'A special assignment prevented Mr. Norman from continuing with tile hearing after
the third session , and Mr . Trent conducted the hearing thereafter.
2 The United Steelworkers of America , CIO, was permitted to intervene at the hearing
on the basis of its current contract for the existing production and maintenance unit.
District No. 9, International Association of Machinists , AFL, which represents the Em-
ployer's machinists at the plant in question intervened to protect its interest , and later
withdrew.
110 NLRB No. 249.