University Motors

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 8, 1950

89 N.L.R.B. 1224 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of UNIVERSITY MOTORS, EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL.
ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, DISTRICT LODGE No. 50, PETITIONER.
Case No. 01-RC-1169.-Decided May 8, 1950
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Jerome Smith,
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 National Labor-
Relations 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 failed to respond to subpenas served upon it to pro-
duce books and records relating to commerce and to testify at the:
hearing with respect thereto. However, evidence introduced by the,
Petitioner establishes that the Employer is engaged in the sale of new
Ford cars and trucks. We take cognizance of the marketing practice-
in the automobile industry of distributing new vehicles only throught
a limited number of authorized dealers. We shall presume, in the:
absence of contrary evidence, that the sales are made in accordance
with the above-described type of distribution arrangement. We
therefore find that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act 2
' At the hearing Employer' s counsel contended that it was error for the hearing officer-
to admit secondary evidence on the question of whether the Employer was engaged in,
commerce within the meaning of the Act. As the Employer Ignored Petitioner 's subpena&
ad testificandum and subpena duces tecum, replies to which would have furnished primary
evidence , we find no merit in this contention . Angelus Chevrolet Co., 88 NLRB 929..
There is no indication of bias or prejudice on the part of the hearing officer.
'Bill Heath, Inc., 89 NLRB 67, Masters Pontiac Co., Inc., 88 NLRB 932. At the
hearing the parties stipulated that the Employer has "a nonexclusive franchise to sell'
new Ford cars ." Although the record fails to explain precisely what was meant by the-
term "nonexclusive ," it appears from the brief that by the use of that term the Em- -
ployer seeks to indicate that he is not the sole distributor of Ford automobiles in the area:
In which he operates . What is controlling in cases of this type , however , is the fact that
a nationally distributed product is sold through a specifically limited number of dealers:
who, by virtue of their franchise, become an integral part of the manufacturer's system
of distribution . Nothing in this record indicates that this fact does not obtain with
respect to the Employer here.
89 NLRB No. 146.
1224
UNIVERSITY MOTORS 1225-
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 following employees of the Employer constitute a unit ap-
propriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
All employees, excluding partsmen, new and used car salesmen,-
office and clerical employees, professional employees, shop foremen,-
watchmen, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the-
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than..
30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was-
heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor-
Relations Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the
unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were
employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the date-
of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work
during said payroll period because they were ill or on vacation or-
temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since
quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or rein-
stated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees.
on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether-
or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bar.--
gaining, by the International Association of Machinists, District.
Lodge No. 50.