Dist. 65 Wholesale, Retail, Office & Processing Union

DIST. 65, WHOLESALE, RETAIL, OFFICE & PROCESSING UNION 791 District 65, Wholesale, Retail, Office & Processing Union and New York State Labor Relations Board and New York University and Office and Profes- sional Employees International Union, Local 153, AFL-CIO. Case AO-124 November 24, 1970 ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR ADVISORY OPINION BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS FANNING, BROWN, AND JENKINS This is a petition filed on September 24, 1970, by District 65, Wholesale, Retail, Office & Processing Union, herein called the Petitioner, for an Advisory Opinion in conformity with Subpart H of the National Labor Relations Board's Rules and Regula- tions, Series 8, as amended, requesting that the Board advise the New York State Labor Relations Board, herein called the State Board, that it is not precluded, as a matter of comity or Federal preemption, from processing to final conclusion the representation proceeding (Docket Case No. SEE-44004) instituted before it by New York University, herein called the Employer. On September 29, the Petitioner filed motion for preference requesting that the petition herein be accorded preferential treatment in its disposition. On October 6, the Employer telegraphed the Board urging, inter alia, expeditious disposition of the petition. Thereafter, on October 9, 1970, Local 153, Office and Professional Employees International Union, AFL-CIO, herein called Local 153, filed a reply to the petition. By letter dated October 14, received October 19, 1970, the Petitioner filed a rebuttal to Local 153's reply in order to correct certain alleged inaccuracies. Although served with a copy of the instant petition, no response as provided by the Board's Rules and Regulations has been filed by the State Board. The Board has duly considered the allegations of the petition, motion, telegram, reply, and rebuttal. The Board's Advisory Opinion proceedings "are designed primarily to determine questions of jurisdic- tion by application of the Board's discretionary standards to the `commerce' operations of an employer." t The basic issue presented herein is whether the Board should advise that the State Board is not precluded, as a matter of comity or Federal preemption, from processing to a final conclusion the representation proceeding instituted before it at a time when the State Board had jurisdiction over the Employer. As this issue does not fall within the intendment of the Board's Advisory Opinion rules, an Advisory Opinion is not an appropriate vehicle for rendering advice on such issue. We shall dismiss the petition herein.2 Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that, for the reasons set forth above, the petition for an Advisory Opinion herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed. I International Air Service, Inc. of San Juan, Puerto Rico, 165 NLRB 584, and cases cited therein. 2 See ibid. 186 NLRB No. 135