Walters Ambulance Service, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 11, 1974

212 N.L.R.B. 422 (N.L.R.B. 1974)

422 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Walters Ambulance Service, Inc. and Association of
United Ambulance Personnel . Case AO-155
July 11, 1974
ADVISORY OPINION
This is a petition filed on May 25, 1974, by Walters
Ambulance Service, Inc., herein called the Employer,
for an Advisory Opinion, in conformity with Sections
102.98 and 102.99 of the National Labor Relations
Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended,
to determine whether the Board would assert jurisdic-
tion over the Employer. On June 11, 1974, the Em-
ployer filed a brief in support of its petition.
In pertinent part, the petition and brief allege as
follows:
1. There is pending before the New York State La-
bor Relations Board, herein called the State Board, a
proceeding with docket numbers, Cases WE-1783,
WU-1793, and WU-1794, involving the Employer
and the Association of United Ambulance Personnel,
herein called the Union.
2. The Employer operates an ambulance service in
and about the Greater Rochester, New York, area. It
purchases its own equipment and hires, schedules,
and supervises its own employees. During the calen-
dar year 1973, its gross annual revenues were
$232,500, of which $85,575.07 represented payments
for nonretail services rendered to institutional users in
the State of New York,' each of whom annually pur-
chased goods and services outside the State of New
York in excess of $50,000.2 During the same period,
the Employer made local purchases of materials, sup-
plies, merchandise, or services in the amount of
$60,083.40.
3. The State Board has not made any formal find-
ings concerning the aforesaid commerce data and the
Employer does not know whether the Union admits
or denies the commerce data.
4. In its brief, the Employer contends that the as-
sertion of jurisdiction over it is warranted by virtue of
its more than $50,000 annual nonretail services to
i Such payments were-
Monroe County Department of Social Services, $43,174 20, Genesee Valley
Medical Care, Inc , $20,979 12, Home Care Association, affiliated with Blue
Cross-Blue Shield, $10,626 75, East Irondequott Central School District #
1, $3,591 00, New York State Board of Cooperative Education, $6,138 00,
and New York State Department of Education (Rehabilitation), $1,06600
2 In its brief, the Employer alleges that it has affidavits from officials of
the first four of the institutional users listed in fn I, above , which it will
submit and which affirm that each of the users make out-of-state purchases
of goods and services in excess of $50,000, and it further submits that the
Board should take official notice that the State of New York makes out-of-
state purchases of goods and materials in excess of $50,000 For purposes of
this Advisory Opinion, the allegations of the affirming affidavits are accepted
as true and official notice of New York State's out-of-state purchases is
taken
institutional users, albeit exempt employers under our
Act, each of whom makes annual out-of-state pur-
chases in excess of $50,000, and over whom the Board
would assert jurisdiction if not exempt.
5. Although served with a copy of the petition, no
reply as provided in the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions has been filed by the State Board or the Union.
On the basis of the above, the Board is of the opin-
ion that:
1. The Employer is a nonretail enterprise engaged
in the operation of an ambulance service in and about
the Greater Rochester, New York, area.
2. The Board's current standard for the assertion of
jurisdiction over nonretail enterprise is an inflow or
outflow, direct or indirect, across state lines of at least
$50,000.'
3. As indicated above, the Employer annually ren-
ders more than $50,000 worth of nonretail ambulance
services to the institutional users listed in footnote 1,
above, five of whom appear to be exempt from our
jurisdiction under Section 2(2) of the Act as govern-
mental bodies.' These institutional users are nonretail
enterprises each of whom makes annual out-of-state
purchases in excess of $50,000. Such purchases consti-
tute sufficient direct inflow across state lines to justify
assertion of jurisdiction over each of the institutional
users under the Siemons standard, if they were not
otherwise exempt under Section 2(2) of the Act. In
Carroll-Naslund,5 the Board treated as indirect out-
flow for jurisdictional purposes services rendered to a
city whose operations were of a magnitude which
would justify asserting jurisdiction over it, if it were
not exempt under Section 2(2) of the Act. Similarly,
the Employer's ambulance services to the exempt and
nonexempt institutional users constitute indirect out-
flow for jurisdictional purposes herein, and, since
such indirect outflow annually exceeds $50,000, it sa-
tisfies the current standard for the Board' s assertion
of jurisdiction over nonretail enterprises.6
Accordingly, the parties are advised under Section
102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations , Series
8, as amended, that on the allegations submitted here-
in the Board would assert jurisdiction over the
Employer's operations with respect to disputes cog-
nizable under Sections 8, 9, and 10 of the Act.
J Sremons Mailing Service , 122 NLRB 81, 85 (1958)
Sec 2(2) of the Act provides that the "term 'employer' . shall not
include the United States or any wholly owned Government corporation.
or any State or political subdivision thereof "
6 Carroll-Naslund Disposal, Inc, 152 NLRB 861, 863 (1965)
6 See Bob's Ambulance Service, 178 NLRB I (1969)
212 NLRB No. 60