Chestnutt's Stores, Inc.

490 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD CHESTNIITr'S STORES, INC., OF LuFKIN, TExAS 1 and LOCAL 408, AMALGAMATED MEAT CUTTERS AND BUTCHER WORKMEN OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 16-RC-986. August 5,1952 Decision and Order Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Charles Y. Latimer, 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, Murdock, and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : The Employer is a Texas corporation with its principal office and only place of business located in Lufkin, Texas. It is engaged in operating a retail food market under the name, "Q. P. Store in Lufkin," a registered assumed name. During the year preceding the date of the hearing the Employer made purchases in excess of $233,000, none of which was made from sources outside the State of Texas. During the same period the Employer's sales, amounting to approximately $287,000, were all made within the State of Texas. The record shows that the Employer's president is also the president of another retail food market, Q. P. Stores, Inc., of Bay City, Texas, and of Grocers Supply Company, Inc., of Houston, Texas. The Employer purchases about one-half of its total purchases from this latter company. The three companies also have the same vice presi- dent and secretary-treasurer. The president of the Employer owns 52 percent of its stock, 72 percent of the stock of Grocers Supply Company, and 251/2 percent of the stock of Q. P. Stores. The purchases and sales of Grocers Supply Company are in excess of approximately $10,000,000. All of its sales are made locally. Approximately 75 percent of its purchases are made, directly or indirectly, from sources outside the State of Texas. These purchases include products such as Post Toasties, Quaker Oats, and various canned products sold throughout the United States. From the foregoing it is clear that the Employer, considered as a separate and independent enterprise, is engaged in a retail business essentially local in nature over which the Board would not normally assert jurisdiction 2 As the additional evidence in the record is in- sufficient to warrant the conclusion that the Employer, in fact, func- ' As amended at the hearing. 3 Federal Dairy Co., Inc., 91 NLRB 638. 100 NLRB No. 77. THE ELYRIA TELEPHONE COMPANY 491 tions as an integrated part of a larger, interstate enterprise consisting of several companies, all of which constitute a single employer, we find that it would not effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case.3 Order IT IS HEREBY oRDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed. S Toledo Service Parking Company, 96 NLRB 268. THE ELYRIA TELEPHONE COMPANY and COMMUNICATIONS WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO, PETITIONER. Case No. 8-RC 1268. August 5, 1959 Supplemental Decision, Amended Description of Unit, and Certification of Representatives On September 13,1951, the Board issued its Decision and Direction of Election herein 1 in a unit composed generally of all the Employer's employees, excluding, among others, the service assistants, who were found to be supervisors. On October 2, 1951, the Petitioner filed a petition for further testimony and reconsideration of the Board's exclusion of the service assistants. The Employer, by letter of October 8, 1951, objected to the Petitioner's petition. On October 9, 1951, the Board denied the Petitioner's request without prejudice to the service assistants voting subject to challenge. Subsequently, on October 10, 1951, an election by secret ballot was conducted under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eighth Region among the employees of the Employer in the unit found appropriate by the Board in its decision. Upon completion of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished the parties. The tally shows that, of the approximately 110 eligible voters, 98 cast ballots, of which 60 were cast for the Petitioner, 26 against, and 12 were challenged.2 On October 12, 1951, the Employer filed an objection to the election on the grounds that the service assistants, whom the Board had found to be supervisors, organized and were the leaders of the Petitioner, and that such conduct by its supervisors interfered with the election. Thereafter, in accordance with the Board's Rules and Regulations, the Regional Director conducted an investigation and, on December 10, ts 196 NLRB 162. 1 The challenged ballots were cast by service assistants. 100 NLRB No. 81.