Star Garter Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 10, 1955

114 N.L.R.B. 957 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

STAR GARTER- COMPANY 957
America, AFL, as the exclusive representative of employees in
the bargaining unit described herein with respect to rates of pay,
wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of employment,
and, if an understanding is reached, embody such understanding
in a signed agreement.
The bargaining unit is :
All plant clerks and standards checkers at our South San
Francisco, California, plant, excluding all other employees,
guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
SWIFT & COMPANY,
Employer.
Dated---------------- By-------------------------------------
(Representative ) - (Title)
This notice must remain posted for' 60 days from the date hereof,
and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
Star Garter Company and Local 444, United Textile Workers-of
America, AFL, Petitioner. Case No. 13-RC-4222. November
10,1955
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, hearings were held before Albert Kleen, hearing of-
ficer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearings are free from
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following rea-
sons:
The Employer is an Illinois corporation engaged in the manufac-
ture and sale of infants' and women's wear, with its sole place of
business in Chicago, Illinois. Its total sales during the calendar
year 1954 amounted to $137,521. During the same period, its pur-
chases totaled $68,862, of which about 80 percent was received directly
from points outside the State of Illinois.
During this period out-of-State sales totaled $22,665, of which
$2,401 went to unidentified customers and $20,254 were in shipments
to Sears Roebuck stores located in other States. All remaining sales
were shipments to purchasers located in the State of Illinois. To
local customers whose annual out-of-State shipments fell short of
$50,000, sales totaled $6,284. To Illinois customers-nonretail enter-
prises-each of whose direct out-of-State shipments exceeded $50,000,
114 NLRB No. 152.
958 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
sales totaled $30,459. To the Illinois warehouse of Spiegel's, Inc.,
passingly referred to in the record as a mail-order house, sales
amounted to $58,667. And to Sears Roebuck in Illinois, sales totaled
$20,254, one-half to its warehouse and one-half to its local retail stores.
On the record before us, it does not appear that the Employer's
operations meet any one of the minimum requirements set out in the
Board's established standards for assertion of jurisdiction.
Direct out-of-State shipments of about $22,000 fall short of the
$50,000 standard.' Because the Employer's products are all finished
goods redistributed by its customers either by wholesale or retail sale,
they are directly utilized in the customers' services; therefore, such
sales properly falling in the indirect outflow category must equal at
least $100,000 annually to establish a basis for assertion of jurisdic-
tion? It is clear that the sales to local nonretail enterprises who an-
nually themselves ship over $50,000 outside the State constitute in-
direct outflow. This is so because the Board would assert jurisdiction
over them on the basis of their own direct outflow. As to the within-
the-State shipments made to Spiegel's, Inc., and to Sears Roebuck,
both retail enterprises, such sales may or may not constitute indirect
outflow depending upon whether the particular stores or units of such
enterprises, which directly receive the Employer's products, themselves
individually make annual shipments of $100,000 out of the State.
This is so because the Board would not assert jurisdiction over these
stores or consumer outlets on the basis of their direct outflow if their
out-of-State shipments were below $100,000.3 The fact that the Board
might also take jurisdiction over such individual stores as integral
parts of sufficiently large multistate chains or on the basis of direct
or indirect inflow is immaterial here. The indirect outflow concept
in our jurisdictional standards is grounded on the assumption of some
form of continued outflow directly into the stream of interstate com-
merce.4 On this point, the record shows only a stipulation of the
parties that sales totaling $78,920 were made to within-the-State retail
enterprises each of whom in turn makes out-of-State sales of over $100,-
000 annually.5 It was not shown that any of these sales were to in-
dividual stores or units of such enterprises which themselves separately
have sufficient direct outflow. We therefore cannot properly consider
these sales as indirect outflow of the Employer.
In sum, so far as it appears, the Employer's direct outflow equals
$22,665 and indirect outflow equals $30,459. Neither separately nor
' Jonesboro Grain Di yang Cooperative, 110 NLRB 481.
s Ibid
s Hogue and Knott Supermarkets , 110 NLRB 543.
a New Jersey Ponitry J P,gg Coopeative Associattoa Inc, 114 NLRB 536
c Apparently, the parties reached this figure by adding the $58,667 sales to Spiegel's,
Inc, and the $20,254 sales to the stores and warehouse of Sears Roebuck, all in the
State of Illinois.
PERSONAL PRODUCTS CORPORATION 959
together do these figures satisfy the minimum established standards.
No other basis for assertion of jurisdiction having been shown, we shall
dismiss the petition.
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
MEMBER MURDocx took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.
Personal Products Corporation and Textile Workers Union of
America, CIO, Petitioner . Case No. 13-RC-3761. November 10,
1955
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION, DIRECTION, AND ORDER
Pursuant to a Decision and Direction of Election dated May 27,
1954,1 as amended on August 9, 1954, an election by secret ballot was
conducted on August 25, 1954, under the supervision of the Regional
Director for the Thirteenth Region, among the employees in the ap-
propriate unit at the Employer's plant in Chicago, Illinois. At the
conclusion of the election, the parties were furnished with a tally of
ballots which discloses that, of approximately 123 eligible voters,
112 valid votes were cast : 58 were cast for the Petitioner, 53 were cast
for the Intervenor,' 1 was cast for no labor organization; and 17 bal-
lots were challenged. The challenged ballots were sufficient in number
to affect the results of the election.
On August 31, 1954, the Petitioner filed timely objections to conduct
affecting the results of the election. In accordance with the Rules and
Regulations of the Board, the Regional Director conducted an investi-
gation and thereafter, on July 6, 1955, issued and served upon the
parties his report on challenged ballots and objections to conduct of
election. Thereafter, the Petitioner and the Employer filed timely ex-
ceptions to the Regional Director's report.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board makes the following
findings of fact :
Of the 17 challenged ballots, the ballots of 8 employees 3 were chal-
lenged by the Petitioner, and the ballots of 9 employees 4 were chal-
lenged by the Board agent on the ground that they were cast by voters
whose names did not appear on the eligibility list prepared by the Em-
ployer. In his report, the Regional Director recommended that all
i Personal Products Corporation, 108 NLRB 1129.
2 United Textile Workers of America, AFL.
3 Willis Reeves ; Earl Roseberry ; Betty Martin ; Marie Bennett ; Nick Becker ; Bertha
LeGrand Stephanie Latka ; Frank Valentino
4 Wilbur Whiteside ; Harold Schlentz; Raymond Hensley ; Vincentia Slepicki ; Mary
Santarelh ; Victoria Kasper ; Marie Kringas ; Stephanie Lewandowski ; Josephine Fryer_
114 NLRB No. 150.