Universal Security Consultants

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 6, 1973

203 N.L.R.B. 1195 (N.L.R.B. 1973)

UNIVERSAL SECURITY CONSULTANTS 1195
Universal Security Consultants and Local 542 , Interna-
tional Union of Operating Engineers . Case AO-146
June 6, 1973
ADVISORY OPINION
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS.
KENNEDY, AND PENELLO
The petition herein was filed on November 14,
1972, by Universal Security Consultants, herein called
the Employer, pursuant to Sections 102.98 and 102.99
of the National Labor Relations Board's Rules and
Regulations, Series 8, as amended, requesting an Ad-
visory Opinion as to whether the Board would assert
jurisdiction over the Employer.
In pertinent part, the petition alleges as follows:
(1) There is pending before the Pennsylvania La-
bor Relations Board, herein called the state board, a
representational petition, Docket No. R-34607-C,
filed by Local 542, International Union of Operating
Engineers, herein called the Union, requesting a unit
of the Employer's employees engaged as guards,
watchmen, and security personnel at Pocono Downs,
a harness and flat racing track located at Route 315,
Wilkes Barre , Pennsylvania.
(2) The Employer, with principal office in Pitts-
burgh, Pennsylvania, is in the business of rendering
guard and security services, within and without the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, to manufacturing
and nonmanufacturing enterprises. Its annual volume
of business exceeds $500,000. Annually, the Employer
renders more than $50,000 worth of services to clients
who are engaged in interstate commerce and purchas-
es more than $50,000 worth of goods from firms locat-
ed outside the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
(3) The state board has made no findings with re-
spect to the aforesaid commerce data which is not
contested by the Union.
(4) No representation or unfair labor practice pro-
ceeding involving this labor dispute is pending before
the Board.
(5) Although served with a copy of the petition, no
response as provided in the Board's Rules and Regu-
lations have been filed by any of the parties.
On the basis of the aforesaid, the Board is of the
opinion that:
In Pinkerton's National Detective Agency, Inc., 114
NLRB 1363, the Board had before it a jurisdictional
issue similar to that herein. In that case, a union peti-
tioned for a unit of Pinkerton detectives who worked
as ushers and patrolmen at the Yonkers, New York,
harness racetrack. Concluding that these employees
were virtually included in the racetrack industry, over
which, as a matter of policy, the Board does not assert
jurisdiction and not wishing to contravene that policy,
the Board dismissed the representation petition on the
ground that the assertion of jurisdiction over that por-
tion of Pinkerton's employees would not effectuate
the policies of the Act. Similarly, in order not to con-
travene our continuing policy of not asserting juris-
diction over the racetrack industry as reflected in our
recent promulgation of a rule declining to assert juris-
diction,' we believe that the Pinkerton precedent
should be followed herein with respect to the
Employer's guards, watchmen, and security personnel
at the Pocono Downs harness and flat racing track.
Accordingly, the parties are advised under Section
102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations that, on
the allegations presented herein, the Board would not
assert jurisdiction over that portion of the Employer's
operations located at Pocono Downs harness and flat
racing track, Route 315, Wilkes Barre, Pennsylvania,
with respect to labor disputes cognizable under Sec-
tions 8, 9, and 10 of the Act.
1 38 F.R 9507, April 17, 1973.
203 NLRB No. 111