S.K.S. Realty Corp.,

74 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD In the matter of S.K.S. Realty Corp., Petitioner. in excess of $170,000. Furthermore, purchases of Case AO-257 heating, oil, which originate outside the State of 30 July 1987 ADVISORY OPINION BY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERS JOHANSEN, BABSON, STEPHENS, AND CRACRAFT A petition was filed on 9 June 1987 by S.K.S. Realty Corp. (the Petitioner) for an advisory opin- ion in conformity with Sections 102.98 and 102.99 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations seeking a determination as to whether the Board would assert jurisdiction over it. In pertinent part the petition alleged as follows: (1) A petition has been filed with the New York State Labor Relations Board (SLRB) by Local 32B-32J, Service Employees International Union, AFL-CIO (the Union) seeking certification of the Union as the collective-bargaining representative of the Petitioner's employees at its apartment building located at 10 Manhattan Avenue, New York, New York. (2) The general nature of the Petitioner's busi- ness is the ownership, operation, control, and man- agement of real estate. The Petitioner owns, oper- ates, and controls the premises located at 10 Man- hattan Avenue, New York, New York, which gen- erates rentals in excess of $230,000 per year. Its principal officer, who operates, manages, and con- trols said premises, also manages, controls, and, through corporate entities, owns other rental pro- ducing premises at 531 East 5th Street, 500 West 135th Street, 254 East 110th Street, 2240 Third Avenue, 2240 Second Avenue, and 464 East 115th Street, which generate over $280,000 per year in rental income. All the aforementioned properties operate out of the same central offices at 239 West 72d Street, New York, New York. Additionally, another principal stockholder of the Petitioner has partnership interests in other real estate in the City of New York which produce annual rental income New York, are in excess of $40,000 per year. (3) The Petitioner is unaware of whether the Union admits or denies the aforesaid commerce data and the SLRB has made no findings with re- spect thereto. The petition also averred that there are no repre- sentation or unfair labor practice proceedings in- volving this dispute pending before the Board. However, subsequent to the petition's filing, the Board was administratively advised that on 30 June 1987 a representation petition, Case 2-RC-20344, was filed with the Board's Regional Office in which the Union seeks to represent the Petitioner's employees at its 10 Manhattan Avenue apartment building-the same employees who are the subject of the SLRB proceeding. On the basis of the foregoing, the Board is of the opinion that the petition for an advisory opinion should be dismissed. Our advisory opinion rules were promulgated to provide a method for state agencies and persons in doubt to determine wheth- er the Board would assert jurisdiction in certain circumstances. Here, however, a statutory repre- sentation proceeding is now pending before the Board, and a binding adjudication of the jurisdic- tional issue can be obtained from the Board within the framework of that proceeding. Because no other considerations suggesting an urgent need for an earlier Board determination of the jurisdictional question alone have been brought to the Board's at- tention, the underlying purpose of the advisory opinion prodedures will be better served, and un- necessary duplication and possible confusion will be avoided, if the Board follows the practice of confining itself solely to the resolution of the statu- tory representation proceeding before it.I Accordingly the petition for advisory opinion is dismissed. 1 See International Bureau for Protection & Investigation, 236 NLRB 1356 (1978); Ma,tre'd Restaurant, !45 NLRB 1161 (1964) 285 NLRB No. 9