Toledo Service Parking Co.

TOLEDO SERVICE PARKING COMPANY 263 Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact , and on the entire record in this, and the former , proceeding, the undersigned makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. International Union, United Automobile , Aircraft and Agricultural Imple- ment Workers of America , CIO (UAW-CIO), Region 6; and International Asso- ciation of Machinists , Lodge 1186, are labor organizations within the meaning of :Section 2 (5) of the Act. 2. By discriminating in regard to the hire and tenure of employment and the terms and conditions of employment of Ann Barnett , Eldon Clark, Dora Ellis, Odean Jenkins, Lela Lea, and Hobert R. Taylor, thereby encouraging member- ship in one labor organization , and discouraging membership in another, the Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act. 3. By discriminating in regard to the hire and tenure of employment of said Ann Barnett, Eldon Clark , Dora Ellis, and Odean Jenkins because they had given testimony under the Act at the hearing in June 1950, and , with respect to said Clark because he had also given testimony in this proceeding, the Respond- ent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (4) of the Act. 4. By continuing to support and assist International Association of Machinists, Lodge 1186, the Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (2) of the Act. 5. By the unfair labor practices recited in paragraphs 2, 3, and 4 , above, and by interrogating, threatening, and engaging in reprisals against its employees, because of their opposition to the IAM, and their allegiance to the UAW-CIO, and by refusing to permit them to revoke authorizations for dues deductions, and coercing them to remain members of the IAM, the Respondent has interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaran- teed in Section 7 of the Act, and has thereby engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1). 6. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 7. The Respondent has not engaged in unfair labor practices within the mean- ing of Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act, with respect to the resignations of Dora Ellis and Odean Jenkins, on or about January 23, 1951, or, within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (4), with respect to the transfer of Ann Barnett to another job on April 10, 1951. [Recommended Order omitted from publication in this volume.] TOLEDO SERVICE PARKING COMPANY and DISTRIBUTION AND WAREHOUSE WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 22, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAM- STERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 8-RC-1261. September 20, 1951 Decision and Order Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Carroll R. Martin, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 96 NLRB No. 38. 264 DECISIONS OF. NATIONAL LABOR :RELATIONS BOARD 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 [Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock]. At the hearing, the Employer moved to dismiss this proceeding on the ground that it is not engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. This motion, which was referred to the Board, is granted for the following reasons. The record shows that, the Employer, an Ohio corporation, is en- gaged solely in operating a parking garage, known as the Civic Center Garage, and four parking lots in the city of Toledo, Ohio. The rev- enue of the Employer, which is approximately $250,000 per annum, is derived from the parking of cars in the Toledo area, and from a service station (operated as part of the garage), which sells gasoline and oil.' A very small proportion of this revenue, approximately $600 per year, is derived from services rendered under contract with the United States Government 2 The income of the Employer, prior to -July 1, 1951, also derived in part from parking services rendered for the Toledo Blade, a daily newspaper, under an oral arrangement involving 16 of the Toledo Blade's delivery trucks. This arrange- ment was discontinued when, on or about July 1, 1951, the Blade opened its own garage. ' The total purchases made by the Employer in connection with its operations approximate $13,000 per annum. About one-half of this amount reflects purchases of gasoline and oil products which may have extrastate origins.s The remainder reflects purchases of office supplies and miscellaneous items, some of which come from out-of- State points. We are persuaded under the foregoing facts and circumstances that. the Employer's enterprise does not meet the standards we have estab- lished for asserting jurisdiction. In so finding, we are not unmind- ful of the record facts showing that the controlling stockholders of the Employer are also controlling stockholders of various other corporations, engaged in business operations similar to that of the Employer in many different States, and that there are certain in- dividuals who are common to the directorate of all such corporations.' ' The Employer is presently selling the products of Gulf Oil Company at its service sta- tion. In prior years it sold the products of Standard Oil Company of Ohio. 2 Parking services are rendered for the following Government agencies under contract : The Immigration Bureau, the Army Recruiting Service, and the Federal Bureau of Investi- gation. The Army Recruiting Service parks three army cars per day in the garage. The Federal Bureau of Investigation agents park a car in the garage only occasionally. No car had been parked by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the Employer 's garage in the 2 months preceding the hearing. There is no evidence with respect to the parking of cars by the Immigration Bureau. 2 The Employer did not know, and the record does not otherwise establish , the origin of the gasoline and oil products handled by the Employer. 4 There is one general manager employed by all the corporations engaged in the business of rendering parking services. BALL BROTHERS COMPANY, INC. 265 We do not believe, however, that such facts establish an integration of these various corporations of such a character that we should regard them, for jurisdictional purposes, as one integrated operation. Nor do we believe that the nominal amount of the services rendered for Government agencies calls for the application of our policy to assert jurisdiction over enterprises which affect the national defense effort.' We need not and do not decide whether or not the Employer is en, gaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. For, in any event, we are of the view that it will not effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case. We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition. Order Upon the entire record in this case; the National Labor Relations Board orders that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed. 5 Cf. Westport Moving and Storage Co., 91 NLRB 902. 9 Including the Employer's brief. BALL BROTHERS COMPANY, INC.' and -FEDERATION OF GLASS, CERAMIC & SILICA SAND WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 35-RC-536. September 00, 1951 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Robert Volger, 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees 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 appropriate unit : The petitioner seeks to add the garage employees at the Employer's Muncie, Indiana, plant, to the production and maintenance unit which it currently represents. In the alternative, the Petitioner would repre- 1 The name of the Employer appears as amended at the hearing. 96 NLRB No. 43.