Houston Automobile Dealers Association

HOUSTON AUTOMOBILE DEALERS ASSOCIATION 947 Houston Automobile Dealers Association and Retail Automobile Salesmen, Local 501, and its International , Retail Clerks Inter- national Association, AFL-CIO, Petitioner Thad Felton Motor Company and Retail Automobile Salesmen, Local 501, and its International, Retail Clerks International Association, AFL-CIO, Petitioner Wendell Hawkins Motors, Inc. and Retail Automobile Salesmen, Local 501, and its International , Retail Clerks International Association, AFL-CIO, Petitioner Albert Berry Dodge Company, Sam Montgomery Oldsmobile Company, Chuck Davis Chevrolet, Inc., Archer Motors, Burkett Motors, Inc., Sam White Oldsmobile Company, Aubrey, Orval & Mac Rambler, Inc., Frank Gillman Pontiac Company, Hig- hams Cadillac Company, Bill Lee Motors, Don McMillian Ford, Inc., Tommie Vaughn Motors, Bland-Willis Cadillac Company, Jack Roach Bissonnet, Inc., and Thad Felton Motor Company, Petitioners and Retail Automobile Salesmen, Local 501, and its International, Retail Clerks International Asso- ciation, AFL-CIO. Cases Nos. d3-RC1692, 23-RC-1664,23-RC- 1671, and 23-RM-91 and 23-RMMI-93 through 23 RM11 1061 August 10, 1961 - DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before John F. Burst, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed 2 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Meembers Rodgers and Fanning]. I The hearing in these cases was held on February 3 and 4, 1961 . The petition in Case No 23-RM-106 was filed on February 7. The Employer and the Union agreed to waive a bearing and to stand on the record in the consolidated hearing of February 3 and 4. We hereby grant the parties' motion to consolidate Case No. 23-RM-106 with the other cases herein involved. "Employers' attorney requested, and was granted by the Regional Director, two subpenas duces tecum, which requested that the Union produce records as to letters of resignation of certain individual members of Local 501. At the hearing, the Union moved to quash the subpenas , and the hearing officer granted the motion on the ground that the only reason for the request ran to the question of showing of interest , which is an administrative matter and not litigable at a representation hearing. We hereby specifically affirm the hearing officer's granting of the motion to quash. See Stokely-Van Camp, Inc., 102 NLRB 1259. 132 NLRB No. 73. 614913-62-vol. 132-61 948 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds: 1. The Employers involved in the elections directed herein are en- gaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act .3 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees of the Employers. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the represen- tation of employees of the Employers within the meaning of Section 9(c) (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The appropriate unit : Early in January 1961, Retail Automobile Salesmen, Local 501, and its International, herein called the Union, filed 22 individual petitions, seeking to represent certain employees of 22 employers in Houston, Texas. Thereafter, on January 19, the petition in Case No. 23-RM-91 was filed. On January 23, the Union then filed its petition in Case No. 23-RC-1692, seeking to represent certain employees of 45 em- ployers who are members of the Houston Automobile Dealers Associ- ation, herein called the Association, or in the alternative, each of the member employers separately. Thereafter, the remaining 13 Employer petitions named above were filed. Because of the petition for an associationwide unit in Case No. 23-RC-1692, the Regional Director dismissed the earlier union petitions, with the exception of Cases Nos. 23-RC-1664 and 23-RC-1671, as the Employers in the latter two cases are not members of the Association. These three union petitions were then consolidated with the Employer petitions for purposes of hearing. All parties agree that a unit composition of "all new and used retail 'automobile and truck salesmen, excluding all other employees, guards, watchmen, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act, is appropriate. However, they are in disagreement as to the scope of the unit. The Petitioner contends that a unit composed of all mem- bers of the Association is the "most appropriate" unit, while the Em- ployers contend that separate single-employer units are appropriate. The Association was formed in 1925 for the purpose of preserving and disseminating business information, adopting rules to govern transactions connected with the automobile trade, and generally to promote the best interests of the trade and a spirit of cooperation among its members. No authority has ever been given the Associa- tion to bargain in behalf of its members, and the Association has never been a party to a collective-bargaining agreement. In the ab- sence of any such authority, and in the absence of a history of multi- employer contracts, we find that an Associationwide or other multi- 3 It was stipulated by the parties that all the Employers involved are engaged in com- merce within the meaning of the Act, and come within the jurisdiction of the Board As we find, below, that the associatlonwide unit is inappropriate, we need not decide the jurisdiction issue as to the Association. HOUSTON AUTOMOBILE DEALERS ASSOCIATION 949 employer unit is not appropriate' We shall therefore consider the appropriateness of the individual employer units sought. At the hearing, the Petitioner amended its alternate position in Case No. 23-RC-1692 to include only the following Employers : Aubrey, Orval & Mac Rambler, Inc.; Burkett Motors, Inc.; Archer Motors; A. C. Burton Company, Inc.; Courtesy Chev- rolet, Inc. ; Chuck Davis Chevrolet, Inc. ; DeMontrond Buick Co.; Jimmie Green Chevrolet; Ivy-Russell Motor Co.; Bill Mc- David Oldsmobile, Inc. ; Gene Mohr Chevrolet Co.; Al Parker Buick Co.; Ray Pearson, Inc.; Jack Roach Bissonnet, Inc.; Luke Johnson Ford Co.; Rosenstock Motors; Snelling Motor Co.; Sam White Oldsmobile Co.; Sam Montgomery Oldsmobile Com- pany; Bud Moore Chevrolet Co.; and Mike Persia Chevrolet Corp. We shall dismiss the petition in Case No. 23-RC-1692 with respect to Courtesy Chevrolet, Inc., Gene Mohr Chevrolet Co., Bud Moore Chevrolet Co., Ray Pearson, Inc., Luke Johnson Ford Co., Aubrey, Orval & Mac Rambler, Inc., Chuck Davis Chevrolet, Jack Roach Bissonnet, Inc., and Mike Persia Chevrolet Corp., and the petition in Case No. 23-RC-1664 (Thad Felton Motor Company), since the Petitioner does not have a sufficient showing of interest among the employees of each of these Employers to warrant directing an election.' At the hearing, the Petitioner stated that it no longer claims to represent the employees of Albert Berry' Dodge Company (Case No. 23-RM-91), Bland-Willis Cadillac Co. (Case No. 23-RM-104), Highams Cadillac Co. (Case No. 23-RM-100), Bill Lee Motors (Case No. 23-RM-101), Don McMillian Ford, Inc. (Case No. 23-RM-102), and Tommie Vaughn Motors, Inc. (Case No. 23-RM-103). There- fore, we shall dismiss the petitions in these cases.' As the Petitioner claims to represent the employees of these Em- ployers, we shall direct elections in the following cases:' Aubrey, Orval & Mac Rambler, Inc. (Case No. 23-RM-98), Chuck Davis Chevrolet, Inc. (Case No. 23-RM-94), Frank Gillman Pontiac Com- pany (Case No. 23-RM-99), Jack Roach Bissonnet, Inc. (Case No. 23-RM-105), and Thad Felton Motor Company (Case No. 23-RM- 106) ; in Case No. 23-RC-1692 with respect to DeMontrond Buick Company, Jimmie Green Chevrolet, Ivy-Russell Motor Company, * See Greater St. Louis Automotive Trimmers & Upholsterers Assoc, Inc , 131 NLRB 75; Chicago Metropolitan Home Builders Association, 119 NLRB 1184. 5 However, elections are directed below, on the strength of the Employer petitions, as to Aubrey, Orval & Mac Rambler, Inc., Chuck Davis Chevrolet, Inc, Jack Roach Bissonnet, Inc., and Thad Felton Motor Company. 6 See Hamilton's, Ltd, 93 NLRB 1076, 1078. 7 As we have been authoritatively advised that A. C. Burton Company , Inc, has gone out of business , we shall dismiss the petition in Case No . 23-RC-1692 with respect to this Employer. r 950 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Bill McDavid Oldsmobile, Inc., Al Parker Buick Co., Rosenstock Motors, and Snelling Motor Company; in Case No. 23-RC-1671 (Wendell Hawkins Motors, Inc.) ; and in Case No. 23-RC-1692, con- solidated with the Employer petitions on file with respect to Archer Motors (Case No. 23-RM-95), Burkett Motors, Inc. (Case No. 23- RM-96), Sam Montgomery Oldsmobile Company (Case No. 23-RM- 93), and Sam White Oldsmobile Company (Case No. 23-RM-97). Accordingly, we find separate appropriate units for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act consisting of the following employees at the places of business in Houston, Texas, of each of the Employers, Archer Motors, Aubrey, Orval & Mac Rambler, Inc., Burkett Motors, Inc., Chuck Davis Chev- rolet, Inc., Frank Gillman Pontiac Company, Sam Montgomery Olds- mobile Company, Jack Roach Bissonnet, Inc., Sam White Oldsmobile Company, DeMontrond Buick Company, Jimmie Green Chevrolet, Ivy-Russell Motor Company, Bill McDavid Oldsmobile, Inc., Al Parker Buick Co., Rosenstock Motors, Snelling Motor Company, Thad Felton Motor Company, and Wendell Hawkins Motors, Inc.; and all new and used retail automobile and truck salesmen, excluding all other employees, guards, watchmen, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act. [The Board dismissed the petitions in Cases Nos. 23-RC-1664, 23-RM-91, 23-RM-104, 23-RM-100, 23-RM-101, 23-RM-102, 23- RM-103, and 23-RC-1692 with respect to Courtesy Chevrolet, Inc., Gene Mohr Chevrolet Co., Bud Moore Chevrolet Co., Ray Pearson, Inc., Luke Johnson Ford Co., Aubrey, Orval & Mac Rambler, Inc., Chuck Davis Chevrolet, Inc., Jack Roach Bissonnet, Inc., Mike Per- sia Chevrolet Corp., and A. C. Burton Company, Inc.] [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.] Pacific Motor Trucking Company and International Brother- hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, and its Locals Nos. 57, 87, 104, 137, 150, 186, 223, 235, 310, 357, 381, 386, 439, 431, 467, 533, 624, 689, 692, 890, 911, 941, 962, 980, and 856, Petitioner. Case No. 20-RC-4462. August 11, 1961 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 M. C. Dempster, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 132 NLRB No. 83.