Howard Johnson

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 8, 1951

94 N.L.R.B. 1161 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

MIL-BUR, INC. 1161,
redistribution of duties, employees in these categories will essentially
be manual. plant workers or factory clerical employees, both proper
categories for inclusion in a production and maintenance unit.
We see no reason to militate against the inclusion of expediters,
as they are, or as the Employer contemplates reclassifying them, in
the existing production and maintenance unit, if the expediters, who
now constitute a representative group of the expansion contemplated,
desire to be represented by the Petitioner. We shall therefore direct
an election in the following voting group : All expediters at the Em-
ployer's West Trenton, New Jersey, aircraft manufacturing plant,
excluding supervisors as defined in the Act. If a ,majority of the
employees. voting select the Petitioner as, their collective bargaining
representative, the Petitioner may bargain for expediters as part of its.
production and maintenance unit.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
MIL-BUR, INC., D/B/A HOWARD JOHNSON and UNITED AMALGAMATED
WORKERS OF AMERICA , LOCAL UNION No. 12, PETITIONER . Case No.
7-RC-12.6. June 8, 1951
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held'beforeGreorge A. Sweeney, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is a Michigan corporation. Its sole stockholders,
Earl R. Milliman and William G. Burgess,' are the operating parties.
to a standard "Operator's Agreement" with the Howard D. Johnson
Company, by which they agree to operate, under the Company's-
_Rupervision, an establishment for the sale of ice cream and other food.
products in Ann Arbor, Michigan, under the Howard.Johnson name,.
in a building owned by them but constructed according to Howard.
Johnson specifications. Among other provisions the agreement re-
quires that the operator shall diligently promote the sale of Howard
Johnson products, including ice cream, purchasing from the Johnson
Company all products manufactured or sold by it which the operator
may need, that it shall maintain acceptable standards of quality for-
all goods sold, for service and for upkeep of the equipment and
pi^en^i:ses,,uppd that it shall. carry certain public liability and work
men's compensation insurance in favor of the Johnson Company. The
94 NLRB No. 169.
1162 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Johnson Company, under the agreement, retains the right to have its
supervisory personnel enter the premises at any time to check the
conduct of the business, the right to terminate the agreement for de-
fault not remedied to its satisfaction , the right to approve an assignee,
and the right to buy the operator 's interest in the premises , the fur-
.nishings and the business in case the operator should wish to sell.
Approximately 317 restaurants, mostly in the northeastern United
'States , operate under the name "Howard Johnson 's," of which only
about*65 are actually owned by the Johnson Company. The Employ-
er's restaurant at Ann Arbor was opened in September 1950 and is
located on a highway between Detroit and Chicago. The Employer's
purchases for the-first. 31/z.months of operation amounted to'itiphroxi-
mately $50,000 of which about $18,000 represented purchases made out-
side the State. All sales are made to customers who patronize the
restaurant. For the same period sales totaled about $100,000. The
Employer estimates that one-third of its business i s from its ,soda,
fountain . The Howard Johnson ice cream sold by the Employer is
received from the Johnson Company's ice cream manufacturing plant
at Cleveland, Ohio. Foodstuffs and other items bought from the
.Johnson Company and some meats are purchased outside the State;
the balance of the necessary provisions for the Employer 's restaurant
.are purchased locally. The Employer takes no position with respect
to commerce.
We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the`unean-
-ing of the Act. Although the business of this Employer is locally
owned and its sales necessarily consummated within the State of Mich-
igan, it is conducted pursuant to an operating agreement as an integral
part of a multistate enterprise devoted to the manufacture and distri-
bution of ice cream and other foodstuffs. Accordingly, we find that it
will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction over this
Employer.,
2. The Petitioner and the Intervenor, Local 794, Hotel and Restau-
rant Employees and Bartenders International Union, AFL are labor
organizations claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
3. A 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.
4. The parties agree that an appropriate unit would consist of all
employees of the Employer's Ann Arbor restaurant, with certain exclu-
'sions. They disagree as to the inclusion of the hostess, cashier-hostess,
head waitress and chef. We find that these four employees are super-
visors because of the authority which each has, and we,slla.1l.,exclude
' See Seven Up Bottling Company of blliami , Inc., 92 NLRB 242: Baxter Brros:.91 NLRB
1480.
MOTOROLA, INC. 1163
them from the unit. The hostess is the wife of the manager, takes his
place during his absence, and has full authority to hire and discharge
employees, assign them work, and discipline them. The cashier-
hostess acts as cashier from 5 until 8 in the evening, and as hostess from
8 until the restaurant closing time at midnight. In the latter capacity
she has full authority to assign waitresses to various stations and can
effectively recommend hiring, discharge, and disciplinary action.
The Employer has no head waitress as such at present, but if business
increases probably will assign the most efficient waitress to that work.
In that event she, although continuing to serve, will take :over the
hostess duties of the cashier-hostess, including authority to assign
waitresses and effectively recommend hiring, discharge, and discipli-
nary action. The chef is in complete charge of the kitchen, including
the kitchen personnel of six employees. He effectively recommends
the hire and discharge of these employees, disciplines them, and assigns
them work.
We find that all employees of the Employer at its Ann Arbor, Mich-
igan, "Howard Johnson's" restaurant, excluding clerical employees,
watchmen, the hostess, cashier-hostess, head waitress, head waiter,'
chef, assistant manager, manager, and all other supervisors as defined
in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
5. The Employer has 8 to 10 part-time employees who, when not so
employed, are housewives or students. They work 2 or 3 nights a week
for a full 8-hour shift each night, and are paid on the same basis as
full-time employees. We find that they have a sufficient interest in
the selection of a bargaining representative to vote in the election
directed herein.
(Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
2 All parties agreed to exclude the head waiter, who apparently works only on Sundays.
No testimony was taken as to his duties.
MOTOROLA , INC. and INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS,
DISTRICT LonGE $k 49. Case No. 21-CA-86e3. June 12, 1951
Decision and Order
On January 5, 1951, Trial Examiner Wallace E. Royster issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor
practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take
94 NLRB No. 181.