Soloff Management Corp.

549 317 NLRB No. 80 SOLOFF MANAGEMENT CORP. 1 The Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. 2 See Parkview Gardens, 166 NLRB 697 (1967), and Imperial House Condominium, 279 NLRB 1225 (1986), affd. 831 F.2d 999 (11th Cir. 1987) (establishing $500,000 standard for residential apartments and for condominiums and cooperatives, respectively); and Mistletoe Operating Co., 122 NLRB 1534 (1959) (holding that jurisdiction will be asserted over commercial office buildings when the employer’s gross annual revenue amounts to $100,000, of which $25,000 is derived from organizations whose operations meet any of the Board’s standards exclusive of the indirect outflow or indirect in- flow standards). 3 See 135–45 West Kingsbridge Avenue Assoc., 300 NLRB 946 (1990); Mandel Management Corp., 248 NLRB 186 (1980). 4 The Board’s advisory opinion proceedings under Sec. 102.98(a) are designed primarily to determine whether an employer’s oper- ations meet the Board’s ‘‘commerce’’ standards for asserting juris- diction. Accordingly, the instant Advisory Opinion is not intended to express any view whether the Board would certify the Union as representative of the petitioned-for unit under Sec. 9(c) of the Act. See generally Sec. 101.40 of the Board’s Rules. Soloff Management Corp., Employer-Petitioner and Local 32E Service Employees International Union, AFL–CIO. Case AO–323 May 19, 1995 ADVISORY OPINION BY CHAIRMAN GOULD AND MEMBERS STEPHENS AND TRUESDALE Pursuant to Sections 102.98(a) and 102.99 of the National Labor Relations Board’s Rules and Regula- tions, on April 25, 1995, Soloff Management Corp., the Employer, filed a Petition for Advisory Opinion as to whether the Board would assert jurisdiction over its operations. In pertinent part, the petition alleges as fol- lows: 1. A proceeding, Case SE–58881, is currently pend- ing before the New York State Employment Relations Board (the state board) in which Local 32E Service Employees International Union, AFL–CIO, the Union, is seeking certification of a one-member unit at 1225 Sheridan Avenue, Bronx, New York (the building), a 54-unit residential apartment building managed by the Employer. 2. The Employer, a corporation, is engaged in real estate management, and maintains its principal place of business at 2562 Briggs Avenue, Bronx, New York. 3. During the past year, the Employer had gross rev- enues in excess of $1 million and purchased goods val- ued in excess of $50,000 directly from outside the State of New York. 4. The commerce data has been neither admitted nor denied by the Union, nor has that data been considered by the state board. 5. There are no representation or unfair labor prac- tice proceedings involving the Employer pending be- fore the Board. Although all parties were served with a copy of the Petition for Advisory Opinion, no response was filed. Having duly considered the matter,1 the Board is of the opinion that it would assert jurisdiction over the Employer. Although it cannot be determined from the allegations in the petition whether the Employer’s op- erations would separately satisfy either the residential or the commercial standard established by the Board for employers that own and/or manage real estate,2 in- asmuch as the petition alleges that the Employer’s gross revenues exceeded $1 million in the past cal- endar year, and that its out-of-state purchases of mate- rials or services exceeded $50,000 during the same pe- riod, we find that it would effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction over the Employer.3 Accordingly, the parties are advised that, based on the foregoing allegations and assumptions, the Board would assert jurisdiction over the Employer.4