Valley Concrete Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 7, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 519 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of ARTHUR B. WOODS, LEwis A. WOODS, AND GEORGE
LINDAHL, CO-PARTNERS DOING BUSINESS AS VALLEY CONCRETE COM-
PANY,1 EMPLOYER AND PETITIONER and GENERAL TEAMSTERS, CHAUF-
FEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS, LOCAL No. 324, AFL, UNION
Case No. 36-RM 44.Decided February 7,1950
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Robert E.
`Tillman, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed .2
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 Murdock.]
Upon the entire record in this case,3 the Board finds :
The Employer is a partnership engaged at Independence, Oregon,
in the business of dredging, processing, and selling sand and gravel,
purchasing and selling cement, and mixing and selling redi-mix con-
,crete. During the year ending September 1, 1949, the Employer pur-
chased cement valued at approximately $35,875. Of this sum, cement
valued at approximately $3,158 was purchased from suppliers located
outside the State of Oregon ; the balance was purchased from a manu-
facturer located within Oregon. The other raw materials used by
the Employer consisted of sand and gravel, which it dredged from a
' The name of the Employer is corrected pursuant to evidence adduced at the hearing.
2 The hearing officer referred to the Board the Union ' s motion made orally at the hear-
ing, to dismiss the petition . For the reasons stated hereinafter, this motion is hereby
:granted. Contrary to the contention of the Employer , a motion may be made orally on
the record at the hearing . Sec. 203.57 , National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regu-
lations.
s After the bearing, the Union filed a motion to strike a brief of the Employer, on the
ground that it contained statements of fact not supported by the record , As each party
is entitled , under the Board's Rules and Regulations , to file a timely brief commenting
on the evidence and setting forth its position , we shall deny this motion. Our decision in
this case is not, however , in any wise predicated upon consideration of factual material
presented for the first time in the Employer 's brief, but solely upon evidence introduced
into the record at the hearing. General Steel Tank Company, 81 NLRB 1345.
88 NLRB No. 116.
519
520 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
river within the State. During this same period, the Employer pur-
chased locally materials for plant repair and maintenance, such as
cables, belting, shafts, and screen cloth, valued at approximately
$10,964, materials for truck repair and maintenance valued at approxi-
mately $6,318, and gasoline and oil valued at approximately $9,826..
All of the gasoline and oil and materials for truck repair and mainte-
nance, and an unspecified portion of the materials for plant mainte-
nance and repair, were produced or manufactured outside the State..
The Employer also purchased, during this same period, capital
equipment valued at approximately $57,000. Equipment valued at
approximately $11,148 was purchased from a supplier located outside
the State of Oregon; the remaining equipment was purchased from
suppliers located within Oregon. With the exception of a scoopmo-
bile, valued at approximately $4,515, all of the equipment purchased
within Oregon was manufactured outside the State.
All of the Employer's sales during this period, valued at approxi-
mately $164,306, were made locally. Of these sales, products valued
at approximately $2,970 were sold for U. S. highway maintenance.
and repair,4 $10,145 for repair and maintenance of the roadbed of
an interstate railroad, $45,719 for the construction of bridges and
for the repair and maintenance of State and county roads, $5,891 for
the construction of a local reservoir, $16,451 to four lumber companies:
for the construction and maintenance of buildings and logging roads,5
and $653 to an agency of the United States Government for the con-
struction of a building. The Employer's remaining sales, approxi-
mately 50 percent of the dollar value of its total sales, were made to
farmers, home owners, and similar local purchasers.
The Union asserts that the operations of the Employer do not
affect commerce, within the meaning of the Act. Although we do^
not find that the Employer's operations are wholly unrelated to com-
merce, we believe that they are essentially local in nature, and that
the assertion of jurisdiction in this case would not effectuate the
policies of the Act.6 We shall, accordingly, dismiss the petition.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition herein be, and it hereby is,
dismissed.
4 Strong Company, 86 NLRB 687, is distinguishable on the facts from the instant case.
In the Strong case, the Employer was itself directly engaged in constructing, maintaining,
and repairing U. S. highways.
5 In excess of 80 percent of the sales of these companies, valued in excess of $6,000,000,
is made to customers located outside the State of Oregon.
6 Standard Concrete Pipe Company, 88 NLRB 163; Makins Sand & Gravel Co., Inc.,
85 *NLRB 213.