Retail Clerks Local 455 (Murray Corp.)

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 9, 1979

241 N.L.R.B. 820 (N.L.R.B. 1979)

Clerks
TRW
23-CC-876),
MOTION
8(b)(4)(ii)(B) 2(6)
transferring
IT
TRUESDALE,
now
questionable
&st
house. G u l j C w f Auromorive Compony. Inc. N.L.R.B.,
F.2d 1979), af Gul/Cwrt
Wurehoure Conlpany, lm., 881 (1977). remanded
case to the
election dealing nion's
relics ita 'icd as exclu-
sive reprtlcntative Coart
merits be
820 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Retail Clerks Local Union 455, Chartered by Retail
International Association, AFL-CIO and
Murray Corporation and Inc., Replacement
Division and Everco Industries, Inc. and Hi-Lo Au-
tomotive Supply, Inc. and Gulf Coast Automotive
Warehouse, Inc. Cases 23-CC-687, 23-CC-688
(formerly 23-CC-691, 23-CC-689,
and 23-CC-690 (formerly 23-CC-988)
April 9, 1979
ORDER DENYING FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT
On July 28, 1977, a consolidated complaint issued
in Cases 23-CC-687, 23-CC-688, and 23-CC-691,
and another issued in Cases 23-CC-689 and 23-CC-
690, alleging that Respondent has engaged in and is
engaging in certain unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section
and Section and (7) of the National
Labor Relations Act, as amended. On August 15,
1977, an order issued consolidating all five cases and
postponing hearing indefinitely. On August 29, 1977,
amended consolidated complaints issued covering all
five cases. Subsequently, Respondent filed an answer,
admitting in part and denying in part the allegations
of the complaint and alleging that the complaint fails
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
On July 16, 1977, counsel for the General Counsel
filed directly with the Board in Washington, D.C., a
Motion for Summary Judgment and a brief in sup-
port thereof, with exhibits attached. On September
15, 1977, the General Counsel filed a motion to
amend his brief. On October 4, 1977, the Board issued
an order the above-entitled proceeding to
the Board and a Notice To Show Cause why the Gen-
eral Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment should
not be granted. Thereafter, the Respondent filed a
brief in opposition to the motion and the Charging
Parties briefs in support thereof. Subsequently, the
Board received briefs amicus curiae and on April 4,
1978, heard oral argument.
Having duly considered the matter, we are of the
view that the present statement of the facts and the
contentions of the General Counsel in this case are
insufficient for the Board to conclude whether or not
Respondent's conduct constitutes a violation of the
Act.' Therefore, we shall deny the General Counsel's
Motion for Summary Judgment.
It is hereby ordered that the General Counsel's
Motion for Summary Judgment be, and it hereby is,
denied.
IS FURTHER ORDERED that this proceeding be,
and it hereby is, remanded to the Regional Director
for whatever action he deems appropriate.
MEMBER dissenting:
Unlike my colleagues, I would not remand this
proceeding to the Regional Director, at least not
without some guidance as to how he should proceed.
Rather, in light of the circuit court's remand to the
Board for an evidentiary hearing on the Employer's
objections to the election, I would defer action in this
proceeding until the representation case has been re-
solved. At that time I would decide the essentially
legal issue posed in this proceeding.
We also that on February 5, 1979, the Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit found the Board certification of the Union as the
exclusive representative of the employees of Gulf Automotive Ware-
In Warehouse v. 588
1096 (5th Cir. the court denied enforcement Auto-
motive 230 NLRB and the
Board for an evidentiary hearing on the Employer's objections to
the with waiver of initiation fees. Since the defense
to the allegations herein on certification by the Boa the
of Gulf Automotive Warehouse Company's em-
ployees, no decision on the in any event would possible at this
time.
241 NLRB No. 178