93 N.L.R.B. 381 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsFeb 21, 1951

93 N.L.R.B. 381 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE' COMPANY 381 Miller-johns Company------------------------------ 1469 L. T. Malone Co------------------------------------ 1470 Bodine Produce Co--------------------------------- 1471 American Fruit Growers, Inc------------------------ ik 1472 Appendix B Arena-Norton, Inc---------------------------------- 21-RC-1428 Lane Whaites Produce Co--------------------------- 1431 Burton Johns--------------------------------------- 1433 E. E. Davis Packing Co., Inc------------------------- 1434 Santa Cruz Farms---------------------------------- 1438 Earl C. Recker Co---------------------------------- 1441 Western Marketing & Sales Co----------------------- 1442 McDonald Vegetable Co----------------------------- 1443 H. P. Garin Company------------------------------- 1445 Birch Bros----------------------------------------- 1447 Cook Produce Co----------------------------------- 1451 M. B. M. Farms____________________________________ 1458 and 1430 Salinas Valley Vegetable Exchange------------------- 1460 Stanley and McDaniels- ----------------------------- 1461 J. A. Wood Company________________________________ 1462 Paul A. Ruth Co------------------------------------ 1467 0. R. Recker Packing Co---------------------------- 1468 METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY PARKLABREA RESIDENT COM- MUNrrY 1 and Los ANGELES BUILDING TRADES COUNCIL, A. F. OF L.,2 PETITIONER. Case No. 21-IBC-1823. February 21, 19,51 Decision and Direction of Election Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Eugene M. Purver, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record of this case, the Board finds: 1. The Metropolitan Life Insurance Company 3 owns and operates, as part of its insurance business, a number of housing projects located in New York City, Los Angeles and San Francisco, California, and Alexandria, Virginia. The present proceeding involves the Parkla- brea Resident Community in Los Angeles, herein called Parklabrea. ' The name of the project of the Employer appears as corrected in its brief The name of the Petitioner appears as amended at the hearing 'For further commerce data as to the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, herein Called the Metropolitan, see Ifettopolitan Life Insurance Company , 64 NLRB 396, wherein the Board assumed jurisdiction over that company 93 NLRB No. 60 382 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Parklabrea, which has a resident manager, is under the general super- vision and control of the Metropolitan's home office in New York City. During the year 1949, the gross income from Parklabrea was $1,196,- 874.80 and the net income amounted to $499,225.69. During the same period, Parklabrea purchased locally materials, equipment, and sup- plies valued at approximately $162,174.25, of which about 25 percent was shipped from points outside the State to local distributors and resold by them to the Employer. The Employer concedes that it is engaged in interstate commerce with regard to its business of insurance. It moves the dismissal of the petition, however, on the ground that Parklabrea is an independent local operation which does not affect commerce within the meaning of the Act, or alternatively, that its impact upon interstate commerce is too remote to warrant the assertion of jurisdiction by the Board. The Petitioner contends that jurisdiction should be asserted because Parklabrea is directly and substantially a part of the multistate oper- ations of the Metropolitan. We find merit in the Petitioner's posi- tion. The parties stipulate that the Metropolitan necessarily invests its funds as an incident of its insurance business. As an outlet for such investment, Parklabrea constitutes an integral part of the Metro- politan's business. Moreover, Parklabrea and the Metropolitan's other housing projects by themselves constitute a multistate enter- prise. Accordingly, the Board denies the motion of the Employer and finds that Parklabrea's activities affect commerce within the mean- ing of the Act and that, as it is an integral part of a multistate enter- prise, it would effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case.4 2. The Petitioner is a labor organization claiming to represent em- ployees 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. In accordance with the stipulation of the parties, we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec- tion 9 (b) of the Act: All maintenance employees, gardeners, and janitors employed at the Employer's- Parklabrea project at Los Angeles, California, and 4 The Borden Company, Southern Division , 91 NLRB 628 The Employer contends in its brief that the decision in N. L. R B. v Shawnee Milling Company, d/b/a Pauls Valley Milling Company, 184 F. 2d 57 (C. A. 10), is applicable to the instant case whatever the applicability of that decision , the Board , with due respect for the opinion of the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, is constrained to adhere to its original view until the Supreme Court of the United States has had an opportunity to pass on the question. PROGRESSIVE MATRIX COMPANY 383 excluding office and clerical employees, guards, watchmen, superin- tendents, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act. 5. The Employer contends that the petition is premature and moves its dismissal because of contemplated expansion in the size of the appropriate unit from 80 employees to an expected complement of 200 employees. As the record discloses that the present complement constitutes a substantial and representative proportion of the contem- plated working force, the Board denies the motion of the Employer and shall follow its usual policy of directing an immediate election.,' [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] Westinghouse Electric Corporation , 87 NLRB 463 PROGRESSIVE MATRIX COMPANY and BINDERY AND SPECIALTY WORKERS UNION No. 182, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF BOOKBINDERS, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 13-RC-1590. February 21, 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 before John P. Von Rohr, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Reynolds]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees 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 Petitioner seeks to represent a unit including all employees in the Employer's shipping department. The Employer contends that the proposed unit is inappropriate, because it comprises an arbi- trary grouping of employees with dissimilar skills and interests, and because it does not include salesmen, porters, and the maintenance man. The Employer is engaged in the manufacture of stereotypes, mats, and plastic ad plates at its plant in Chicago, Illinois. Its products 93 NLRB No. 59.