110 N.L.R.B. 682 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

Wallace Motors, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsOct 29, 1954

110 N.L.R.B. 682 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

682 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD WALLACE MOTORS. INC. and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHIN- ISTS, LOCAL No. 750, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 30-RC-965. Oc- tober 29, 1954 Decision and Order Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Clyde F. Waers, hearing of- ficer. 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 : At the hearing, the Employer and the National Automobile Dealers Association moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the EnI- plover was not subject to the jurisdiction of the Act and that, in any case, it would not effectuate the policies of the Act for the Board to assert jurisdiction herein. This motion was referred by the hearing officer to the Board. The Employer, a corporation, sells at retail and services new and used automobiles at its sole place of business in Colorado Springs, 'Colorado. The Employer operates under a nonexclusive franchise -with the Ford Motor Company. Pursuant to this franchise, the Em- ployer in 1953 purchased from the Ford Motor Company new cars in the value of $764,000. These cars were ordered from local Ford rep- resentatives in Colorado but were shipped to the Employer from out- -of-State points. During the same year, the Employer purchased locally parts in the value of $60,000, of which $46,000 was known by -the Employer to have been produced outside Colorado. The State 'of origin of the balance was not known to the Employer. In addition, -the Employer in 1953 purchased accessories, gasoline, oil, grease, and tires, in the total value of about $42,000. Purchases of used cars for 1953 totalled $842,000 in value. Although the record does not so specify, we infer, in the absence of any evidence to the contrary, that all used cars were purchased locally. All sales of new and used cars -were made within the State. For reasons stated in the Wilson-Oldsmobile case,' we do not con- sider the fact that the Employer has a franchise agreement with the Ford Motor Company as in itself sufficient ground for asserting our jurisdiction in this case. In the Wilson case we stated that, contrary to our former policy, we would assert jurisdiction over franchised automobile dealers only if they met the jurisdictional standards ap- plicable to local retail establishments generally. As set forth in Hogue The National Automobile Dealers Association was allowed to intervene at the hear- ing to permit it to present evidence with respect to the operations of automobile dealers generally, for consideration by the Board in connection with the jurisdictional issue in this case 2 110 NLRB 534. 110 NLRB No. 100. CHECKER CAB CO. 683 and Knott Supermarkets,' those standards are met only if the em- ployer has an annual direct inflow of 1 million dollars or an annual indirect inflow of 2 million dollars or direct out-of-State sales of -$100,000 per annum. As none of these requirements is satisfied here, we find that it would not effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case. The petition will therefore be dismissed. [The Board dismissed the petition.] MEMBER MURDOCK took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order. 3 110 NLRB No. 68. R. H. WILLIAMS D/B/A CHECKER CAB CO. AND BATON ROUGE YELLOW CAB CO., INC. and EMPLOYEES OF ASSOCIATION OF YELLOW AND CHECKER CAB CO., PETITIONER. Case No. 15-RC-1061. October 29, 1954 Decision and Order Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before William W. Fox, 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 case, the Board finds : The Employer owns and operates two taxi companies in the city of Baton Rouge, Louisiana. These companies provide a preponder- ance of the taxi service available to white passengers in Baton Rouge, particularly for passengers picked up at bus and rail depots. The Employer also provides the only airport limousine service for the 3 .airlines serving Baton Rouge, having a written exclusive agreement with Delta Airlines for such service and oral agreements with the other 2. Approximately 31 percent of the Employer's gross revenues are derived from trips to and from bus, rail, and airline terminals. Jurisdiction will not be asserted over the Employer. We are will- ing to concede that taxicab companies, like those involved in this -case, may fall within the broad scope of the Board's legal power to :assert jurisdiction. However, as recognized by the Courts,' the Board may properly refuse to exert the full limits of this power when the assertion of jurisdiction would not effectuate the basic pur- poses of the Act. Before the 1950 jurisdictional plan was promulgated, the Board itself, in a series of decisions issued August 15, 1950, found that the 1 See, e . g., N. L. R. B. v. Denver Bldg. & Construction Trades Council , at at., 341 U. S. 675, 684. 110 NLRB No. 109.