Norman Davis, Inc.

NORMAN DAVIS, INC. 753 WE WILL NOT promise employees wage raises or other benefits if they vote against or abandon said union. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of rights guaranteed under Section 7 of the Act. All our employees are free to become or remain , or to refrain from becoming or remaining, members of said Union or any other labor organization. ROCKWELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY KEARNEY DIVISION, Employer. Dated------------------- By------------------------------------------- (Representative ) (Title) This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. Employees may communicate directly with the Board 's Regional Office, 1200 Rialto Building, 906 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri , 64106, Telephone No. Baltimore 1-7000 , Extension 731, if they have any questions concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions. Norman Davis, Inc. and Raymond Marin. Case No. A 0-58. May 23, 1963 ADVISORY OPINION This is a petition filed on April 24, 1963, by Raymond Marin, herein called the Petitioner, for an Advisory Opinion in conformity with Sections 102.98 and 102.99 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended. On May 6, 1963, Ross M. Madden, Regional Director for the Thir- teenth Region of the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Regional Director, filed a motion to intervene setting forth the jurisdictional facts developed in his investigation of the representa- tion petition in Case No. 13-RM-683 filed by Norman Davis, Inc., herein called the Employer. The motion of the Regional Director to intervene is hereby granted. Thereafter the Regional Director filed herein a copy of the commerce data questionnaire submitted in Case No. 13-RM-683 as well as a copy of a letter and affidavit from the Employer's accountant dated April 17,1963. In pertinent part, the petition, intervention, commerce data ques- tionnaire, and letter and affidavit of April 17, 1963, allege as follows : 1. The Petitioner and Harold Freed are party defendants in a chancery proceeding, docket No. 63 C 5156, presently pending in the Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois. The complaint in the court proceeding also names, as a party defendant, the Amalgamated Cloth- ing Workers of America, herein called Amalgamated, for whom the Petitioner and Freed allegedly have been acting as employees, agents, and representatives. 142 NLRB No. 88. 754 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 2. The chancery proceeding had been filed by the Employer and other plaintiffs seeking temporary and permanent injunctive relief from the court, enjoining the Petitioner, Freed, and the Amalgamated from picketing, parading, or congregating in front of or near the Employer's store in Chicago, Illinois. The picket signs advise the public that the Employer's tailors are nonunion. 3. The complaint also alleges that the Amalgamated has been and is picketing to compel and coerce the Employer to enter into a union- security contract with the Amalgamated notwithstanding that the Employer's employees do not desire same and that the Amalgamated does not represent a majority of the employees. 4. The Employer is an Illinois corporation with its sole place of business at 4009 West Madison Street, Chicago, Illinois, where it operates a retail store selling men's clothing. For the last fiscal year ending July 31, 1962, the Employer's gross volume of business was $334,764, while for the fiscal year ending July 31, 1961, it was $338,465. The Employer's purchases during fiscal 1962 were $195,441 and dur- ing fiscal 1961 were $169,696, of which approximately $150,000 origi- nated outside the State of Illinois. 5. No findings with respect to the commerce data hereinabove set forth have been made by the circuit court. 6. There is presently pending before the Thirteenth Region of the National Labor Relations Board the representation petition in Case No. 13-RM-683. On the basis of the above, the Board is of the opinion that: 1. The Employer is a retail enterprise operating a men's clothing store in Chicago, Illinois. 2. The current standard for the assertion of jurisdiction over retail enterprises which fall within the Board's statutory jurisdiction is a gross volume of business of at least $500,000 per annum.' For the fiscal year ending July 31, 1962, the Employer's gross volume of retail business was $334,764 and for the fiscal year ending July 31, 1961, it was $338,465. During each of these fiscal years, the Employer's gross volume of business did not meet the retail standard for the assertion of jurisdiction by the Board. Accordingly, the parties are advised under Section 102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, that the Board would not assert jurisdiction over the Employer because the allega- tions submitted herein do not establish that its operations meet the Board's standard for asserting jurisdiction over retail enterprises? Carolina Supplies and Cement Co., 122 NLRB 88; Wallace Shops, Inc, 133 NLRB 36; see also Irvin Morgan, t/a Morgan Shoe Company , 129 NLRB 1339 ; Tri-County Truck Stop, 139 NLRB 61. 2 Morgan Shoe Company, supra; Tri-County Truck Stop, supra