Associated Cleaning Contractors, Inc.

ASSOCIATED CLEANING CONTRACTORS, INC. 731 Associated Cleaning Contractors , Inc. and Team- sters Local Union 612, affiliated with Interna- tional Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, Petitioner. Case 10-RC-8008 July 31, 1970 DECISION ON REVIEW BY MEMBERS FANNING, BROWN , AND JENKINS On February 18, 1970, the Acting Regional Director for Region 10 issued his Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representative in the above-entitled proceeding, in which he overruled in their entirety the Employer's objections to an elec- tion hereinbefore held on January 6, 1970.' Thereafter, pursuant to National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, the Employer timely filed a request for review in which it contended, inter alia , that the Acting Regional Director erred in failing to consider an offer of proof submitted by the Employer in support of its contention that the National Labor Relations Board should decline to assert jurisdiction herein.' By telegraphic Order dated June 3, 1970, the Na- tional Labor Relations Board granted the request for review as to the objections involving the ju- risdictional issue and denied it in all other respects. Thereafter the parties filed briefs on review. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel. The Board has considered the entire record in this case, including the briefs on review and the Petitioner's brief, and makes the following findings of fact: The Regional Director, in his Decision and Direction of Election hereinbefore issued, based his assertion of jurisdiction over the Employer, in part, on his finding that the janitorial services which it performed were not so intimately related to the educational activities of the University of Alabama as to entitle it to share the latter's exemption from the Board's jurisdiction. He further found that the Employer's contention that the University is a joint employer of the employees involved was unsup- ported by the record. The Board denied the Em- ployer's request for review of the Regional Director's Decision. The Acting Regional Director, in his Supplemen- tal Decision and Certification of Representative concluded that Objections 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7 raised jurisdictional issues which had previously been resolved. We granted the Employer's request for review of the Acting Regional Director's disposition of these objections because of the Employer's con- tention that no consideration had been given to an offer of proof previously submitted to the Regional Director on the question of joint employer earlier raised. We have examined the Employer's offer of proof and rejected it for the following reasons: Assuming without deciding that the offer of proof establishes that the University shares in controlling the activities of the janitorial employees involved, we are satisfied, upon the record herein, that the Employer retains sufficient control over the em- ployment conditions of unit employees to enable it to bargain effectively should the employees select the Petitioner as their representative.3 Accordingly, we agree with the Regional Director's assertion of jurisdiction herein and his Supplemental Decision and Certification of Representative, as modified above, is hereby af- firmed on review, except that the effective date of the Petitioner's certification shall be the date of is- suance. ' The tally shows that of approximately 153 eligible voters , 107 cast bal- lots for, and 24 against , the Petitioner Three ballots were challenged, none void ' The Employer also filed two supplemental briefs ' See Herbert Harvey, Inc , 171 NLRB 238 184 NLRB No. 96