Woodland Hills Country Club

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 12, 1964

146 N.L.R.B. 330 (N.L.R.B. 1964)

330 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
For more than 7 months following the Board Order, the parties
apparently bargained 4 It -is the Employer's position- that by Old
Electralab's bargaining for 5 months in 1962 and by New Electralab's
bargaining for over 7 months in 1963, it has satisfied the requirement
of bargaining for 'a full certification year, and that its RM petition
was therefore not premature.
We` are not so persuaded. In Mar-Jac Poultry Company, Inc.,5 an
employer's refusal to bargain during the certification year caused us
to grant to a union a period of "at least one year of actual bargaining"
from the,date of the settlement agreement. Here, the Employer not
only refused to bargain with the IAM during the certification year
but also recognized another union as the bargaining agent of its em-
ployees. Furthermore, we are not satisfied on this record that either
Old or New Electralab bargained in good faith at any time prior to
April 19, 1963, when the Board approved the settlement stipulation.
Under the circumstances, we find that IAM is entitled to at least 1
year of actual bargaining from that date. The instant petition is
therefore untimely and we shall dismiss it.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
4 Testimony taken at the hearing, held on December 19, 1963, reveals that the parties
held their first postsettlement meeting on April 29 and bargained through November, at
which time they reached an impasse in negotiations.
6136 NLRB 785.
Greenacres, Inc., d/b/a' Woodland Hills Country Club and Mis-
cellaneous Warehousemen, Drivers & Helpers, Local 986,
I.B.T.C .W. & H. of A., Petitioner. Case No. 21-RC-8739. March
12, 1964
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under. Section 9(c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer
Howard Fabrick. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hear-
ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel [Members Leedom, Fanning, and Brown].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer operates a private golf and country club in Wood-
land Hills, California. It furnishes recreational facilities in the form
of a golf course and a swimming pool to its members and their guests.
It also sells food and beverages to its members and guests, operating
for that purpose a restaurant, dining room, and bar.. It does not,
however, maintain or operate any housing facilities.'
146 NLRB No. 37.
THE BUNKER HILL COMPANY 331
During the calendar year 1962, the Employer's gross revenues
amounted to approximately $587,000, of which $365,000 represented
gross annual sales of goods, products, commodities, and/or revenue
from services, while $222,000 represented dues and initiation fees
of members.
The Employer contends that the Board should not assert jurisdic-
tion because its operations do not satisfy the jurisdictional standard
for retail enterprises.
The Board decided in Walnut Hills Country Club i that the retail
standard is the applicable standard for operations of the nature en-
gaged in by the Employer. In Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board
(Chartiers Country Club),a the Board, in determining whether or not
the gross volume of business of a nonprofit organization such as the
Employer's herein meets the Board's retail standard, did not count
the annual dues of members as income derived from its retail opera-
tions. As the Employer's retail sales are less than the $500,000
required,' we find that it will not effectuate the policies of the Act
to assert jurisdiction herein. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the
petition .4
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
1145 NLRB 81.
2139 NLRB 741.
8 Carolina Supplies and Cement Co ., 122 NLRB 88, 89.
' Member Leedom , who did not participate in the decision in Walnut Hills, supra, con-
curs in the result in this case as he would not under any circumstances assert jurisdiction
over an operation such as this . See, e.g., his dissenting opinion in Walter Carl Ray,
et at., d/b/a Ray, Davidson & Ray, 131 NLRB 433, 436.
The Bunker Hill Company and Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders,
Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers, AFL-CIO, Petitioner
The Bunker Hill Company and International Union of Mine,
Mill and Smelter Workers, Petitioner
The Bunker Hill Company and Local Lodge No. 1425, Inter-
national Association of Machinists, AFL-CIO, Petitioner
The Bunker Hill Company and United Steelworkers of America,
AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Cases Nos. 19-RC-3317, 19-RC-3318,
19-RC-3390, and 19-RC-3324. March 13, 1964
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Hearing Officer
John N. Zimmerman. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hear-
ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
146 NLRB No. 43.