Bloch Enterprises, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 21, 1968

172 N.L.R.B. 1678 (N.L.R.B. 1968)

1678 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Bloch Enterprises , Inc. and Prime Rib Room, Inc.
and Hotel and Restaurant Employees and Barten-
ders Union , Local 847 , AFL-CIO, Petitioner.
Case 26-RC-3146
August 21, 1968
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS BROWN
AND JENKINS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Hearing Officer James D.
Walpole of the National Labor Relations Board.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel.
The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby af-
firmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
finds:
1. Bloch Enterprises, Inc., herein referred to as
Bloch, is the owner of a building in Memphis, Ten-
nessee, which is identified herein as the Sheraton
Motor Inn. The building contains motel room ac-
commodations and a restaurant, meeting rooms,
and a cocktail lounge, all of which are presently
identified to the public as a single operation under
the Sheraton Motor Inn name. The motel and
restaurant share common parking facilities and
serve many of the same customers. Motel and
restaurant customers may enter the restaurant
either from an inside motel lobby entrance or from
separate outside entrance.
The Sheraton franchise was obtained by Bloch
from Sheraton Inns, Inc., under an agreement dated
October 23, 1962. The franchise agreement covers
both the motel and restaurant operations, and
requires Bloch to abide by certain stated standards
uniformly required for all motel and restaurant
operations conducted under the Sheraton trade-
mark name. The agreement affords the Sheraton
Inns, Inc., a right of inspection and grants to the
franchisee (Bloch) the privilege of assigning the
part of the franchise relating to the restaurant to
another, subject to the assignee's compliance with
the standards and conditions imposed by the
franchise agreement.
Bloch alone operated both the motel and the
restaurant under the franchise agreement until
April 1, 1968. On April 1, 1968, Bloch entered into
a 10-year lease agreement with Prime Rib Room,
Inc., herein referred to as Prime Rib. Under this
agreement, Bloch granted Prime Rib the exclusive
right to operate for its own profit the restaurant,
meeting rooms, and cocktail lounge, in considera-
tion of the payment to Bloch of $4,500 per month,
plus 10 percent of the gross receipts in excess of
$27,500, for the duration of the lease.
Bloch's lease to Prime Rib refers to Bloch's
franchise agreement with Sheraton and grants
Prime Rib the right to operate the restaurant busi-
ness under the Sheraton service trademark subject
to Prime Rib's compliance with the standards and
conditions specified in Bioch's franchise agreement
with Sheraton. Although article XXII of the lease
provides that Prime Rib may advertise the restau-
rant in its own name and as an operation separate
from the motel, subject to Bloch's approval, other
language in the same article indicates that even if
Bloch were to grant Prime Rib the right of separate
advertising, Prime Rib would nonetheless be
required to identify the operation with the Sheraton
chain by using the Sheraton service mark.' Other
provisions of the lease obligate Prime Rib to: (1)
provide room service to motel guests under certain
standards and at rates not to exceed specified
amounts; (2) keep the restaurant open at specified
hours; (3) give motel customers the privilege of
charging their restaurant purchases to their motel
room bill, but to bear a proportionate cost of credit
card issuer charges where credit cards are used to
pay motel bills that include restaurant charges.
The lease does not, however, reserve to Bloch
any control over Prime Rib's establishment, or
restrict its right to hire, fire, supervise, or set the
hours, wages, and working conditions of restaurant
personnel, or otherwise control its labor relations
policies.
The hearing in this proceeding was conducted
shortly after the above-described lease arrangement
between Bloch and Prime Rib was made, and there-
fore the parties, for purposes of applying the
Board's jurisdictional standards, used the motel and
restaurant receipts for the 5-month period in 1968
to project the amount of gross business of each
operation for the entire year. They estimated that
the total 1968 receipts in each operation will be
about 10 percent less than those for the fiscal year
' Evidence was adduced at the hearing that Bloch had granted Prime Rib
the right to advertise the restaurant in its own name and to use a separate
sign But as of the date of the hearing, the new signs for the motel had not
been constructed and the separate advertising plans had not yet been im-
plemented
172 NLRB No. 191
BLOCH ENTERPRISES, INC.
1967.2 Under this projection, the motel receipts will
amount to about $297,000, and the restaurant
receipts to about $225,000. The combined total of
the parties' business, as thus projected, is thus in an
amount sufficient to satisfy the Board's hotel indus-
try jurisdictional standards. Both Employers main-
tain, however, that jurisdiction may not be properly
asserted on that basis as they do not constitute a
single employer within the meaning of the Act and
each conducts his business independently of the
other.
We agree that Bloch and Prime Rib do not
together constitute a single employer within the
meaning of our relevant principles. Each establishes
its own labor relations policies and has its own
managers and officers. The operations do not
jointly purchase materials, nor do they receive joint
credit from their respective creditors. Furthermore,
there is no interchange of personnel between the
restaurant and motel. But it does not automatically
follow from this that the two operations should not
be considered as one for purposes of testing the im-
pact on commerce which would result from a labor
dispute at either operation. Consistent with the
principles we have enunciated in analogous cases,
we find that it is appropriate to do so in the instant
case and that it would effectuate the policies of the
Act to assert jurisdiction over both Employers
herein.' As in these other cases, the operations of
both Employers share a common situs, use the
same parking facilities, serve essentially' the same
customers, and although separately managed, are
conducted in such a manner as to supplement each
other and to convey to the public the impression
that they are both integral parts of a single enter-
prise, i.e., the "Sheraton Motor Inn." As the com-
bined business of the two operations shows that
they affect commerce within the meaning of the
2 Gross receipt., from these operations in the fiscal year amounted to
about $580,000, of which $330,000 represented motel receipts, and
$250,000 represented restaurant receipts
' Trade Winds Motor Hotel & Restaurant, 140 NLRB 567 Cf Leisure
World Sales Corp , Inc, 163 NLRB 668
' It was stipulated that during the 12-month period ending April 1, 1968,
Bloch Enterprises, Inc , purchased and received goods and materials
valued in excess of $ 12,000 directly from points located outside the State
of Tennessee
1679
Act 4 and satisfies our jurisdictional standards for
the hotel industry, we shall accordingly assert juris-
diction over the Employer's operations.
2. The labor organization involved claims to
represent certain employees of the Employers.
3 A question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning representation of employees of the Em-
ployers within the meaning of Sections 9(c)(1) and
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks to represent a single unit
embracing both motel and restaurant employees,
but, in the alternative, would proceed to an election
in separate units. The parties have stipulated to the
scope of appropriate separate units. Having con-
cluded that Bloch and Prime Rib are separate em-
ployers, we find , in accordance with the stipulation
of the parties, that the following employees con-
stitute separate units appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act:
1. All maids, porters, housemen , bellmen,
maintenance and laundry employees employed
by Bloch Enterprises , Inc., at Sheraton Motor
Inn, but excluding the housekeeper, the
manager, the assistant manager , all auditing
employees , desk clerks, PBX operators , reser-
vation personnel, secretaries , office clerical
employees , professional employees , guards,
watchmen , and supervisors as defined in the
Act.
2. All cashiers, waitresses, cooks, busboys,
bartenders, salad girls, maids, and dishwashers
employed by Prime Rib Room , Inc., at
Sheraton Motor Inn , but excluding managers
and supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Direction of Elections5 omitted from Publica-
tion. )
s An election eligibility list, containing the names and addresses of all the
eligible voters, must be filed by the Employer with the Regional Director
for Region 26 within 7 days after the date of this Decision and Direction of
Election The Regional Director shall make the list available to all parties
to the election No extension of time to file this list shall be granted by the
Regional Director except in extraordinary circumstances Failure to
comply with this requirement shall be grounds for setting aside the election
whenever proper objections are filed Excelsior Underwear Inc , 156 NLRB
1236 -