Nance Buick Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 24, 1956

116 N.L.R.B. 984 (N.L.R.B. 1956)

984 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Nance Buick Company; Fulwiler Motor Company; Rollins
Motor Company; Lone Star Motor Company ; AB Poe Motor
Company and Truck Drivers, Chauffeurs , Warehousemen and
Helpers, Local Union No . 941, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Cases Nos.
33-RC-560, 33-RC-561, 33-RC-56?, 33-RC-563, and 33-RC--564.
August 04,1956
DECISION, DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS, AND ORDER
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated 1 hearing was held before
L. L. Parterfield, 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 consolidated proceeding the Board
finds :
1. All the Employers are located in the State of Texas where they
are engaged in the purchase and sale of new and used automobiles, and
automotive parts and accessories.
Rollins Motor Company and Lone Star Motor Company, each pur-
chases goods annually from outside the State of Texas valued in excess
of $1,000,000. We find that each of these Employers is engaged in
commerce and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert
jurisdiction over them.2
With respect to A. B. Poe Motor Company, the record discloses that
it and El Paso Wholesale Parts Company are partnerships owned by
the Poe family. A. B. Poe Motor Company sells.Chrysler automo-
biles, while El Paso Wholesale Parts Company distributes Chrysler
parts and accessories. Both companies occupy space in the same
building and, although each sells different products, has a separate
labor force and maintains a separate payroll and bank account, both
companies are under the overall management of A: B. Poe. The A. B.
Poe Motor Company annually purchases goods outside the State of
Texas valued in excess of $400,000. El Paso Wholesale Parts Com-
pany annually purchases goods from outside the State of Texas valued
in excess of $400,000. In addition, El Paso Wholesale'Parts Company
makes annual sales in excess of $450,000, 80 percent of which are made
outside the State of Texas. A. B. Poe purchases all its parts and ac-
cessories from El Paso.
In view of the common ownership and control of both companies by
the same family, their physical proximity and the partial integration
1 The Petitions in 2 other cases-Cases Nos. 33-RC-565 and 33-RC-559-involving
2 other employers , were originally consolidated with the instant cases . However, on
May 28, 1956, the petition ' in Case No . 33-RC-565 was withdrawn . On June 3, 1956, after
the hearing herein, the parties executed an agreement for consent election in Case No.
33-RC-559, as a result of which that case was remanded to the Regional Director for
proceeding in accordance with the terms of that agreement.
2 w icon-Oldsmobile Company, 110 NLRB 534.
116 NLRB No. 109.
NANCE BUICK COMPANY 985
of their operations we find contrary to the contention of the Employer
that A. B. Poe Motor Company, and El Paso Wholesale Parts Com-
pany constitute a single employer for jurisdictional purposes; that
such employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act;
and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction
over A. B. Poe Motor Company.'
Nance Buick Company is a Delaware corporation which sells Buick
automobiles. During the past year it purchased automobiles and ac-
cessories valued at approximately $3,000,000, of which $50,000 was re-
ceived directly from points outside the State of Texas. The balance
of its purchases consists of automobiles delivered to it from a General
Motors assembly plant in Texas. As the interstate volume of business
of this Employer does not meet any of the standards enunciated in the
Wilson Oldsmobile case,4 we find that it will not effectuate the policies
of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. • We shall, accordingly, dis-
miss the petition in Case No. 33-RC-560.
Fulwiler Motor Company is a Texas corporation which sells Ford
automobiles and trucks. The Employer annually purchases goods
valued in excess of $4,500,000, of which approximately $890,000 in
value is obtained from outside the State of Texas. The balance of its
purchases consists in automobiles received from a Ford assembly plant
in Texas. During the same period it made sales of $6,500,000, virtu-
ally all of which were made within the State of Texas. We find that,
as the interstate volume of business of this Employer does not meet the
standards enunciated in the Wilson Oldsmobile case, it will not effec-
tuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. We shall,
therefore, dismiss the petition in Case No. 33-RC-561
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employers.
3. Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the representa-
tion of employees of certain of the Employers herein within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. We find appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act, separate units composed of
the following employees, excluding all other employees, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act : -
e Raymond Pearson, Inc, 115 NLRB 190. Wilson-Oldsmobile Company, Inc., supra.
See footnote 5, infra.
5 we find no merit in the Petitioner's contention that jurisdiction should be asserted
over Nance and Fulwiler because they operate under franchises from General Motors
Corporation and Ford Motor Company, respectively, and because they purchase more
than $2 000 000 worth of automobiles annually from local plants of these manufacturers.
The record shows that such purchases consist of automobiles which are assembled in
plants within the State of Texas, from components originating in other States Such
purchases do not constitute indirect inflow for the purposes of our jurisdictional standards.
See Wilson-Oldsmobile Co., supra, and Kenneth Chevrolet Company, 110 NLRB 1615.
Nor do we consider it relevant for purposes of asserting jurisdiction over Nance that the
General Motors Corporation owns 25 percent of its stock and, through a subsidiary, finances
Nance's purchases of cars.
986 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
In Case No. 33-RC-562: All new and used car salesmen of Rollins
Motor Company employed at 415 Montana St., and at 2111 Wyoming
St., El Paso, Texas.
In Case No. 33-RC--563: All new and used car salesmen of Lone
Star Motor Company, Inc., employed at 1500 Texas St., El Paso,
Texas.
In Case No. 33-RC-564: All new and used car salesmen of A. B.
Poe Motor Company employed at 601 Texas St., El Paso, Texas.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
[The Board dismissed the petitions in Cases Nos. 33-RC-560 and
33-RC-561.]
MEMBER MuRDOCS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision, Direction of Elections, and Order.
The Youngstown Steel Door Company and Lodge No. 209 , Inter-.
national Association of Machinists , AFL-CIO, Petitioner.
Case No. 13-RC-4956. August 24, 1956
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9. (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Rush F. Hall, hear-
ing 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 is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees
of the Employer.2
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen-
tation 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:
1 United Construction Workers, affiliated with District 50, United Mine Workers of
America, and its Local Union No. 469, herein referred to collectively as the Intervenor,
and individually as United Construction Workers, and Local 469, intervened on the basis
of their contractual interest in the employees involved herein.
2 The parties stipulated that the Petitioner and United Construction Workers are labor
organizations within the meaning of the Act. The Petitioner refused to enter into a
similar stipulation with respect to Local 469 , contending that although Local 469 was
admittedly a labor organization within the meaning of the Act as of March 29, 1956,
thereafter it ceased to exist and is now defunct , and accordingly is no longer a labor
organization within the meaning of the Act. For the reasons stated in paragraph 3, we
find that Local 469 is not defunct. As it participated with United Construction Workers
in negotiating and executing collective-bargaining contracts with the Employer , and has
administered these contracts , we find Local 469 is a labor organization within the meaning
of the Act.
116 NLRB No. 105.