Rutland Free Library

524 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Rutland Free Library and Local 1201, American Federation of State, County & Municipal Em- ployees and Vermont Labor Relations Board, Petitioner. Case A0-274 August 22, 1990 ADVISORY OPINION BY CHAIRMAN STEPHENS AND MEMBERS CRACRAFT, DEVANEY, AND OVIATT Pursuant to Section 102 98(b) of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations, on January 16, 1990, the Vermont Labor Relations Board (the State Board) filed a petition for an advi- sory opinion as to whether the Board would assert jurisdiction over the Rutland Free Library (the Employer) In pertinent part the petition alleges (1) that the Employer is a "pnvate, non-profit li- brary", (2) that the Employer and Local 1201, AFSCME (the Union) are parties to a representa- tion proceeding, Docket No 89-57, which is cur- rently pendmg before the State Board, and (3) that although the State Board has not yet made any findings in that proceeding, the Employer had made representations dunng the investigation that its gross annual revenues are "less than $1 million" and that it annually purchases over $50,000 worth of goods from out of state sources Although advised of their right to file statements of position on the State Board's petition, neither the Employer nor the Union have done so Having duly considered the matter,' we are of the opinion that we would not assert junsdiction over the Employer We find that libraries are most closely analogous to art galleries and other "cultur- al enterprises" which serve as "an adjunct to the educational system," and that the $1 million discre- tionary standard the Board has established for such institutions should therefore apply 2 Here, as the petition indicates that the Employer's gross annual revenue is "less than $1 million," it is clear that the Employer fails to meet that standard Accordingly, the parties are advised that, based on the allegations in the petition, the Board would not assert jurisdiction over the Employer MEMBER OVIATT, dissenting Contrary to my colleagues, I would not establish or adopt jurisdictional standards in an unlitigated advisory opinion proceeding Although I recognize that all parties are provided an opportunity to com- ment in an advisory opinion proceeding, they very often, as in this case, do not do so Accordingly, I would dismiss the petition for advisory opinion and await a litigated case to adopt a standard for librar- ies 'The petition does not allege, nor are we aware, of any unfair labor practice or representation cases involving this dispute currently pending before the Board or its Regional Offices 2 See Wave Hifi Inc. 248 NLRB 1149 (1980), and cases cited therein Based on data obtained by the Board, It appears that the adoption of this standard will bring approximately 15 percent of the private nonprofit li- brary establishments and 43 percent of the employees within the cover- age of the Act—percentages roughly equal to the overall percentages of other types of pnvate nonprofit establishments and employees that are covered under the "cultural/educational-adjunct" standard 299 NLRB No 90