Rochester Civic Music Association, Inc.

ROCHESTER CIVIC MUSIC ASSOCIATION 587 Rochester Civic Music Association, Inc. and Rochester Orchestra Association. Case AO-143 July 31, 1972 ADVISORY OPINION The petition herein was filed on May 1, 1972, by Rochester Civic Music Association, Inc., herein called the Employer, pursuant to Sections 102.98 and 102.99 of the National Labor Relations Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, to determine whether the Board would assert jurisdic- tion over the Employer on the basis of its current jurisdictional standards. Subsequently, on May 22, 1972, the Employer submitted a brief in support of its petition. In pertinent part, the petition alleges as follows: 1. There are pending before the New York State Labor Relations Board charges filed by Rochester Orchestra Association, herein called the Union, alleging that the Employer engaged in certain unfair labor practices, Cases WU-1705, WU-1716, WU-1717, WU-1718, and WU-1719. 2. The Employer is a nonprofit corporation engaged in operating and maintaining the Rochester Philharmonic Orchestra. 3. The Employer's petition and supporting brief show that during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1971, the Employer's income and expenditures amounted to $1,325,119.12 and $1,234,638.80, re- spectively, and that both its inflow and outflow exceeded $50,000. 4. The State Board has made no findings with respect to the aforesaid commerce data. 5. An unfair labor practice proceeding involving the same labor dispute is now pending in the office of the General Counsel, Case 3-CB-1828, to obtain review of the Regional Director's refusal to issue a complaint on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction. 6. Although served with a copy of the petition, no response as provided in the Board 's Rules and Regulations has been filed by any of the parties. 7. The Employer alleges, in substance, that, although it is aware that the Board , in Philadelphia Orchestra Association, 97 NLRB 548, declined to assert jurisdiction over a nonprofit symphony orches- tra, the Philadelphia Orchestra case is no longer vital and that the Board should assert jurisdiction over a nonprofit symphonic orchestra that meets the juris- dictional standards established for comparable com- mercial institutions. 8. Section 102.98(a) of the Board's Rules and Regulations states as follows: (a) Whenever a party to a proceeding before any agency or court of any State or territory is in doubt whether the Board would assert jurisdiction on the basis of its current jurisdictional standards, he may file a petition with the Board for an advisory opinion on whether it would assert jurisdiction on the basis of its current standards. The Board has considered the Employer's conten- tions and arguments and is of the opinion that, on the basis of the foregoing, the Board would not assert jurisdiction over the Employer under its current standards. Accordingly, the parties are advised under Section 102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, that, on the allegations presented herein, the Board would not assert jurisdiction over the Employer's operations with respect to labor disputes cognizable under Sections 8, 9, and 10 of the Act. 198 NLRB No. 75