Lamar-Rankin Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 19, 1949

81 N.L.R.B. 222 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of LAMAR-RANKIN COMPANY, EMPLOYER and RETAIL
CLERKS INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 10-RC-379.-Decided January 19,19.1j.9
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing officer
of the National Labor Relations Board. 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 National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board
Members.*
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees of
the Employer.
3. No 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, for the following
reasons:
The record shows that the Employer has undertaken the liquidation
of its wholesale drug business, and that, at the time of the hearing, this
program was approximately 90 percent complete. With the excep-
tion of about 10 percent of its inventory remaining for final disposition,
the Employer has virtually discontinued its business activities; and,
although it does not contemplate selling or liquidating its real estate
or securities, negotiations are being carried on for the lease of its
property. The Employer intends to move its remaining records and
assets into storage, and does not plan to reengage in the drug business
or any other mercantile or manufacturing business.
* Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Gray.
81 N. L. R. B., No. 37.
222
LAMAR-RANKIN COMPANY 223
The record shows also that on September 27, 1948, the date the peti-
tion was filed, there were approximately 43 employees in the requested
unit; however, by December 1, 1948, the date of the hearing, there re-
mained only 4 employees in the proposed unit, and the Employer as-
serted that no employees would be left by January 1, 1949. Under all
the circumstances, we believe that no useful purpose would be served
by directing an election in the instant proceeding. Accordingly, the
petition will be dismissed.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.