North Middledale Corp.

NORTH MIDDLEDALE CORP. North Middledale Corp. and Local 307, SEIU. Case AO-227 November 28, 1980 ADVISORY OPINION BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS JENKINS, PENELLO, TRUESDAI.E The petition herein was filed on October 7, 1980, by North Middledale Corp., herein called the Peti- tioner, pursuant to Sections 102.98 and 102.99 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, seeking an advi- sory opinion regarding Board jurisdiction. In pertinent part, the petition alleges as follows: (1) Currently pending before the New York State Labor Relations Board are two proceedings, Docket Nos. SU-53064 and SU-53065, presumably filed by Local 307, SEIU, herein called the Union, in which the Petitioner has been charged with en- gaging in unfair labor practices arising from dis- criminatory discharges motivated by alleged union activity. (2) The Petitioner is engaged in the business of managing apartment house complexes. In addition to its responsibilities for collecting rents, maintain- ing and repairing apartments, and maintaining grounds, it functions as owner of the properties as it assumes all responsibility for profit and loss. It presently manages three such complexes compris- ing 18 buildings in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, Long Island, New York, which yield gross rev- enues of approximately $790,000 per year. During the year ending May 30, 1980, the Petitioner pur- chased locally gas and electricity totaling $56,436, oil totaling $130,248, and supplies and materials used for maintenance and repair totaling $57,000. It believes that an indeterminate proportion of the goods purchased were manufactured outside the State of New York. On the basis of the above, the Petitioner submits that the Board has jurisdiction over its operations. 3. The Union, which does not contest Board ju- risdiction, neither admits nor denies the foregoing commerce data. The State Board has made no find- ings with respect thereto. 4. There is no representation or unfair labor practice proceeding involving this labor dispute presently pending before the Board. 5. Although served with a copy of the Petition for advisory opinion, none of the parties filed a re- sponse thereto as permitted by the Board's Rules and Regulations. On the basis of the foregoing, the Board is of the opinion that: 1. The Petitioner is engaged in the business of managing apartment house complexes in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, Long Island, New York. 2. The Petitioner contends that the Board should assert jurisdiction over its operations citing the Board precedents in James Johnston Property Man- agement, 221 NLRB 301 (1975), Adelsberg & Co., 225 NLRB 952 (1976), and Henry R. Mandel d/b/a Mandel Management Company, Managing Agent for Greenwich Village Community Housing Corp., 229 NLRB 1121 (1977), where jurisdiction was asserted over property managing employers each of whom derived an annual gross revenue of $500,000 or more. As indicated above, the Petitioner derives in excess of $500,000 annually from its management of its apartment complexes and, therefore, meets the monetary standard set forth in the above-cited pre- cedents. Assuming that an indeterminate proportion of its purchases were of goods manufactured out- side the State of New York and were more than de minimis, the Board's statutory jurisdiction over the Petitioner would also be established. Accordingly, the parties are advised, under Sec- tion 102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, that, based upon the allega- tions herein, the Board would assert jurisdiction over the operations of the Petitioner with respect to labor disputes cognizable under Sections 8, 9, and 10 of the Act. 253 NLRB No. 60 481