National Association of Broadcast Engineers and Technicians

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 30, 1951

95 N.L.R.B. 1470 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

1470 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the boilers, or make other changes; and he supervises certain of the
Employer's shipping operations, referred to in the record as the "load-
ing rack," where loaders are employed. As already noted, the chemist
is paid by monthly salary. In these circumstances, we find that the
chemist responsibly directs employees within the meaning of the
Act, and we shall therefore exclude him.,,
The office managers and a clerk share the clerical work in the plant
office. The evidence shows that both the office manager and the clerk
perform the same type of work and, in connection therewith, are under
the direct supervision of the plant superintendent. However, each
of them is sufficiently experienced regularly to do the work without
specific instruction or direction. It was testified that the classification
of office manager was established in this instance as a means of re-
warding the present incumbent for length of service without, at the
same time, effecting any change in his duties. While it does appear
that the office manager may in certain circumstances give instructions
to the clerk, it is clear that such instructions would be routine in
character. Both these individuals are hourly paid. On these facts,
we are of the opinion that the office manager is not a supervisor, as
contended, and we shall include him 1s
We find that all employees employed at the Employer's gasoline
plant near Hawkins, Texas, including the office manager, but exclud-
ing the plant superintendent, the chief engineer, the schedule super-
visor, the chemist, professional employees, guards, and supervisors
as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
8 As we shall exclude the chemist as a supervisor , we find it unnecessary to pass upon
the Union 's further contention that the chemist is a professional employee under the Act.
9 T. B. Alford.
io See e. g., The Connecticut Electric Manufacturing Co, 94 NLRB 1449; J. P.
Rteven8 & Co., Inc., supra.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BROADCAST ENGINEERS AND TECHNICIANS,
INDEPENDENT and TELEPROMPTER SERVICE CORP . AND TELEPROMPTER
EQUIPMENT CORP. Case No. 9-CD-40. August 30, 1951
Decision and Determination of Dispute
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This proceeding arises under Section 10 (k) of the Ast, as amended,
which provides that "whenever it is charged that any person has
95 NLRB No. 199.
NATIONAL ASSOC. OF BROADCAST ENGINEERS AND TECHNICIANS. 1471
engaged in an unfair labor practice within the meaning of paragraph
4 (D) of section 8 (b), the Board is empowered and directed to hear
and determine the dispute out of which such unfair labor practices
shall have arisen, ..."
On February 15, 1951, Teleprompter. Service Corp. and Tele-
prompter Equipment Corp., herein jointly called Teleprompter, filed
with the Regional Director for the Second Region a charge against
the National Association of Broadcast Engineers and Technicians,
Independent, herein sometimes called the Respondent, or NABET,
alleging in substance. that the said labor organization and its agents
violated Section 8 (b) (4) (D).,_of.the Act, in that since on or about
February 13,,1951, the Respondent has engaged in a strike and h%@.
induced and encouraged, and continues to induce and encourage,- the
employees of the National Broadcasting Company, herein sometimes
called NBC, to engage in a strike or concerted refusal in the course
of their employment to use or otherwise handle or work on equipment
or to perform any services _ for the purpose of forcing or requiring
Teleprompter to assign particular work to members of NABET,
rather than to Teleprompter's own employees, who are members of
Theatrical Protective Union No. 1, IATSE, herein sometimes called
Local No. 1.
Thereafter, pursuant to. Sections.102.74 and 1Q2`75 of Board Rules,:
and Regulations, the Regional Director investigated the charge and
provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice to all parties.
In accordance therewith, a hearing was held on April 16, 17, 18, and
19, 1951, before James V. Constantine, hearing officer of the Board.
All parties appeared at the hearing. and were afforded full opportunity
to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses , and to adduce
evidence bearing on the issues. The rulings of the hearing officer made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby af-
firmed.' All parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with
the Board. Local No. I filed a brief' with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board 2 makes the following
3 Pursuant to a motion of Local No. 1, the hearing orncer excluded all witnesses other
than parties to the hearing, and under this ruling , over the objection of the Respondent,
there were excluded three witnesses who had been subpoenaed by the General Counsel
and had refused to testify on the advice of the Respondent ' s counsel, although the
Respondent 's counsel did not preclude the possibility of their testifying at a later stage
in the proceeding . During the hearing the Respondent requested leave to appeal this
exclusion ruling. The Board denied the request for leave to appeal on the ground that
the request offered insufficient reason for the Board to inquire into the merits of the
ruling at that stage of the proceeding. Thereafter the Respondent did not renew its
objection or make any further showing of actual prejudice as a result of the hearing
officer's ruling . Under all the circumstances of the case , we find that the exclusion was
not an abuse of the hearing officer's discretion.
s Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act,
the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three -member panel
[Chariman 'Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock].
1472 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. Teleprompter 's business
Teleprompter Service Corp. and Teleprompter- Equipment Corp.,
together with Teleprompter Corp., not herein otherwise involved, are
New York corporations organized in January 1951 for the purpose of
developing and exploiting a device know as a teleprompter.° The
three corporations have identical officers, directors, and stockholders,
and maintain a common office in,the City of New York. Teleprompter
Corp. holds the patent applications on the device and manufactures
and owns the equipment .4 Through exclusive intercorporate arrange-
ments, Teleprompter Equipment Corp. leases such equipment to pro=
ducers and sponsors of television shows, and Teleprompter Service
Corp., in conjunction therewith, contracts with the producer or spon-
sor for the operation and servicing of the equipment, furnishing the
necessary personnel in connection therewith.
During the first 31/2 months of Teleprompter's operations, it had
contracted with the following firms to supply teleprompter equipment
and services in connection with the televising of certain programs over
the networks of NBC and the Columbia Broadcasting System, herein
sometimes called CBS:
(a) Benton & Bowles, an advertising agency, as agents for the
Procter and Gamble Manufacturing Company. This agreement is for
1 year, is cancelable at the end of any 13-week period, and calls for
the payment of between $25,000 to $30,000 in fees for the full.year. -
(b) - Calkins & Holden, an advertising agency, as agents for Stokely-
Van Camp, Inc., sponsors and producers of the Little Show. This
agreement as at present drawn appears to be for an indefinite term
and is cancelable upon 1 week's notice. The agreement will provide
approximately $10,000 in fees for a full year.
(c) CBS, directly, for two television shows a week at an annual fee
of $30,000. This agreement is oral and apparently commits neither
party-beyond the initial performance of the two shows selected.
8 A teleprompter is an electrical device which furnishes visual aid to actors performing
on television shows by displaying the lines of the script. The device is approximately
30 x 18 x 6 inches in dimension and contains an. electrically rotated script with letters
about an inch high . One or more such units are placed in strategic positions about a
studio set and are regulated by a master control unit located off stage. Although one
or more of such units are in a fixed position on the set, it is often necessary to provide
an additional mobile unit or units, in which event the mobile unit is moved about the
set.by a worker referred to as a "pusher ." The person who operates the master control
is known as the "operator."
4 The unit is manufactured in the States of New York and New Jersey by independent
firms under contract with Teleprompter Corp. At the time of the hearing, Teleprompter
Corp. had only 13 units, but an additional 100 units were on order, 25 of which were
scheduled to be delivered within 90 days.
NATIONAL ASSOC . OF BROADCAST ENGINEERS AND TECHNICIANS 1473
(d) Arthur Godfrey ' for his television show o the 'CBS network.
This agreement is an oral agreement, for 1 year beginning April 18,
1951 ; is cancelable at the end, of any 3-week period , and provides for
annual fees of approximately .$20,000.
In addition Teleprompter has contracted with sponsors and pro-
ducers.of other : television shows on an ;experimental or one-show basis.
The income derived; from such, contracts has amounted . to $,1,,000.
Notwithstanding.. the.,fact thrat .,the.CBS contract did not commit
either party beyond the initial performance of thetwo shows selected,
and the remaining contracts are cancelable at the . end of any 13-week
or shorter period, we are satisfied by the record as a whole that there
is a reasonable expectancy that these contracts will be continued. at
least for •a period of a year . In any event we consider the weekly
charges under those agreements as indicative of Teleprompter's min-
imum earning capacity ,5 and sufficient to warrant the expectation that
it will continue to do business at least at the rate established by its
weekly charges during the first few months of its existence .6
It was stipulated that the Procter and Gamble Manufacturing Com-
pany, and Stokely-Van Camp, Inc., are concerns , each of which ship
goods in interstate commerce valued at more than $25,000 annually,
and its was further conceded that the National Broadcasting Company
and the Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc., are instrumentalities and
channels of interstate and foreign commerce, over which the Board
has asserted jurisdiction .7 The,record shows that the revenue received
by NBC from the 57 affiliated stations in 35 States for the air time
purchased for the Little Show amounts to $18,300 per week , and that
an additional unspecified amount is received by NBC for the use of
the facilities of Studio 3A, in which the-Little Show originates..
Under the circumstances of this case , we find that Teleprompter
Service Corp . and Teleprompter Equipment Corp. constitute a unitary
enterprise which is engaged in interstate commerce within the mean-
ing of the Act. As such enterprise furnishes goods and services valued
at the rate of more than $50,000 annually to companies which function
as instrumentalities and channels of interstate commerce, and to enter-
prises engaged in producing or handling goods destined for out-of-
State shipment in the value of more than $25,000 annually , over which
we have jurisdiction ; we find , apart from other commerce factors
herein •existing which could serve as an added basis for asserting juris-
"There was testimony in the record to the effect that Teleprompter with its present
equipment can handle approximately $ 150,000 in annual volume of business and that
with the new equipment which is to be delivered it will be able to handle another $750,000
to $1,000,000 in annual volume of business.
General Seat and Back Mfg . Corporation, 93 NLRB 1511.
' See National Broadcasting Company, 89 NLRB 1289 ; Columbia Broadcasting System,
Inc., 88 NLRB 343.
1474 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
diction, that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdic-
tion herein.,,
2. The,dispute
a. The facts
The Little Show is a 15-minute program originating, as indicated,
in NBC's Studio 3A in New York City. It is broadcast twice weekly
over 57 of its affiliated stations located in 35 States. In accordance
with the agreement, the equipment of Teleprompter was first used on
February 6, 1951, in connection with the performance of the show in
NBC Studio 3A. Teleprompter assigned the work of operating the
master control to its permanent employee, one Greg Fisher, a member
of Local No. 1, and assigned the work of moving the mobile unit, nec-
essary for the proper performance of;the show; to. another Local No..1
member. On February 8, when the equipment -was again, used on
the same show, one Carl A. Cabasin, a member of NABET and a tech-
nical director for. NBC assigned to Studio 3A for the performance of
the show, told his supervisor, Reid Davis, that the engineering and
technical staff, all members of NABET, could not operate. with the
teleprompter equipment in the studio. He indicated further that his
instructions in that regard came from "the union." Notwithstanding
this protest, rehearsal and performance of the show on that day went
off without further incident.
As a result of this incident and the position ostensibly asserted by
NABET, on February 12, Irving Kahn, one of the principal officers of
the Teleprompter corporations, telephoned NABET's treasurer,
George F. Maher, in Chicago in an effort to reach some working
agreement with NABET. Kahn testified that Maher told him that as
he (Maher) saw it, it had to be a NABET operation complete ordt
wouldn't work and that Maher also said during this conversation that
"We will strike" unless Teleprompter agrees to hire NABET mem-
bers. When Kahn proposed a temporary waiting period of 30--tor60
days during which operations in the studio could be studied in order
to determine whether or not it was, in fact, a NABET operation,
Maher seemed receptive to this suggestion and said that he would have
to think it over. At Kahn's- request he agreed to let Kahn know by
telegram of his decision, one way or another. After this conversation
with Maher, Kahn advised Calkins & Holden of the possibility of
union trouble, and at their expressed willingness to carry,'on with
Kahn, on his assurance that he would do everything topotect the
8 Hollow Tree Lumber Company, 91 NLRB 635.
NATIONAL ASSOC.- OF BROADCAST ENGINEERS AND TECHNICIANS 1475
show from interruption, Kahn prepared cue cards' for the next day's
performance of the show.
For the February 13 performance of the Little Show, Kahn again
assigned. Fisher as control operator and a man from Local No. 1 as
pusher. At about 4:45 p. in., shortly before rehearsals were to begin,
Walter Mullaney, 'a member of NABET and an NBC technical director
assigned to the show for that day, announced to Kahn on the floor of
Studio 3A, in the presence of other members of the engineering and
technical staff in the studio, that "I have been ordered by my union
not to do the show unless NABET personnel operates the equipment,"
and -further indic1 .1.ated that he had received such. instructions, from
Cliff Gorsuch, 'national representative of NABET. Kahn informed
Mullaney of his conversation with Maher of the previous day and
suggested to Mullaney that possibly the matter might be straightened
out if they could speak to Maher. Mullaney replied that if he were to
receive word from Maher that it was all right to go ahead with the
show he would do so.
Present in the studio at the time of this conversation with Mullaney
were Harry L. Abbott, television representative of Local No. 1, and
Davis, NBC technical supervisor. Kahn asked Abbott if he would be
willing toumakeesome concession, on a temporary basis, to NABET so
as to avoid interruption to therehearsafand the performance of the
show. When Abbott agreed it was decided to call Maher in Chicago.
In the ensuing telephone conversation with Maher, Maher repeated
what he had told Kahn the previous day, that was, that "This has to be
a NABET operation." Kahn protested his inability to make it a com-
plete NABET operation but asked whether some compromise could
not be reached and suggested -Maher speak to Abbott in an effort to
reach such compromise. Whereupon Abbott joined in the telephone
conversation with Maher, and as a result thereof an arrangement was
made between the two for a "man-for-man standby for 30 days." 10
On being, advised of the agreement. reached between the two unions,
Kahn' hurried from Davis' office-back to the studio to inform Mullaney
thereof, and to get rehearsal started immediately.. When he reached
the studio, at about 5: 15 p. m., Kahn observed that the entire engineer-
ing and technical staff, including the cameramen, microphone boom
engineers, and dolly pushers, were sitting about the set and not per-
forming any of their customary duties. Kahn told Mullaney of the
9 These cards contain the text of the script for the show and are held up before the
actors to prompt them on their lines . The employees who perform this task -are not
members of"'N_ABET.
'",Abbott testified that in the course of his conversation with Maher , .Maier toEd him
,that, If NABET men did not operate the teleprompter . it would not be used.
961974-52-vol. 95-94
1476 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL. LABOR RELATIONS BOARD..
agreement just made and asked him to- start rehearsal, but Mullaney
refused saying that he was sorry but he could do nothing until he heard
,directly from Maher or Gorsuch 11 At that moment Mullaney was
,called to the telephone to speak-to Maher, and on his return to the
studio Mullaney announced, "I just spoke to Maher. It is okay. We
can go ahead, but you have to hire a NABET man on the spot, and we
have a man-for-man deal" Kahn thereupon released the Local No. 1
;man he had hired as pusher- and requested Davis to assign a NABET
-member of his engineering and technical crew to serve as pusher during
rehearsal Davis assigned such an employee, whereupon NBC's engi-
neering and technical staff assumed their . customary posts, work
.:started, and rehearsal went forward, approximately 15 minutes after
its scheduled time of 5 p. M.
The next day, February 14, Abbott met with Gorsuch to work out the
-terms of the agreement made with Maher. Gorsuch. insisted that the
:agreement must be reduced to writing and signed by Abbott and an
officer of IATSE. Abbott refused to enter into a written agreement,
claiming, among other things, that there was no such understanding
Teaehed with Maher. Gorsuch thereupon indicated that under the
.circumstances there could be no deal, and stated to Abbott that if tele-
prompter equipment were brought into the studio, he would have to
advise his people not to have anything to do with the show unless such
,equipment was operated by NABET personnel.
.. On February 15, the scheduled date for another performance of the
Little Show, Davis telephoned Kahn and told him not to bring his
equipment on the set that day because he (Davis) had been warned' by
'his engineering staff that they would strike if the equipment were
brought in. The same information was also related to Kahn by
Calkins & Holden. Later that day, at rehearsal time, Cabassin, who
was on duty as technical director, told Kahn that "We will not work.
I have been instructed by Mr. Gorsuch and my union not to work if
the teleprompter is used on the set, IA operated." Asked by Kahn if
it was a NABET work stoppage, he answered, "Yes." Although it
was then 5 p. m. and time for rehearsal, none of the engineering and -
technical staff were at work. It was not until Kahn instructed his
manager to withdraw the men assigned to the work, from the tele-
prompter equipment and resort to the use of cue cards, did rehearsal
start-10 minutes after its scheduled time. Later that evening
Gorsuch told Kahn in the presence of others that NABET's position
u The technical director is in charge of the engineering and technical staff throughout
rehearsal and performance of the television show. He is the only one permitted to give
instructions to the. engineering , staff and apparently also directs the pusher in his
movements . The record indicates that a technical director is also often the spokesman
on union matters for the engineering staff.
NATIONAL ASSOC.- OF BROADCAST ENGINEERS AND TECHNICIANS 44,77
dead not changed and that•eitlier'NABET operatedrall of the equip-
ment or it wouldn't- operate. The regular televised performance of
that evening was broadcast with the use of cue cards and not'with
teleprompter equipment.
The next performance of the show on February. 20, was given with
,the-use of teleprompter equipment`butwithout the employment of any
NABET member by Teleprompter. Apparently there was no attempt
by the engineering and technical staff to interfere with rehearsal or
the broadcast performance. Moreover, no further incidents of the
,character occurring on February:13 and February 15 has since occurred.
However, the Board has not been advised of any settlement of the dis-
pute, and insofar as is known, NABET has not altered its position with
respect to its demand that the work of. operating teleprompter equip-
ment be assigned to NABET members only.
However, as a result of the February 13 and 15 incidents Calkins
& Holden, although completely satisfied with the performance of the
device, declined to execute the standard form of agreement providing
for a full year's use of the equipment. Instead Calkins & Holden
entered into an agreement-with Teleprompter which provided that
until such time as Teleprompter shall have worked out a complete
arrangement with "the union," their obligation to use' the equipment
would be cancelable upon 1 week's notice.
b. Bargaining history
Respondent concedes that it represents none of. Teleprompter's em-
ployees and that it has no collective bargaining agreement with
Teleprompter providing for the employment of NABET's members.
On the other hand, the record shows that on February 8, 1951, Tele-
prompter entered into an agreement for: a period of 90 days with
Theatrical Protective Union No. 1 pursuant to which Teleprompter
agreed to employ a member of this union as control operator and to
employ floor operators when necessary 12
c. The contention of the parties
Both Teleprompter and Local No. 1 contend in substance that the
Respondent violated Section 8 (b) (4) (D) by engaging in a strike and
encouraging its members to engage in a work stoppage in order to
compel Teleprompter to assign the work of operating its equipment to
NABET members rather than to Teleprompter's employees, who were
members of Local No. 1. Apparently the Respondent seeks to justify
22 As we make no specific finding with respect to the right of Theatrical Protective
Union No . 1 to an assignment of the work in question, we need not ' pass upon the legality
of the agreement , particularly as, by its terms , it has since expired.
1478 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
its action with respect to Teleprompter's employment of Local No. -1
members by reliance on its bargaining contract with NBC. The Re-
spondent's apparent position is that the introduction of teleprompter
equipment into the studio created impossible working conditions for
its members employed by NBC and therefore that the. Respondent had
a right under its contract with NBC to take action to protect its
members.
d. Applicability of the statute
As we have held, the power to proceed in a Section 10 (k) proceeding
depends upon-the existence of reasonable cause to-believe that-a viola--
tion of Section 8 (b) (4) (D`)" has been committed.13 The record
clearly establishes that on February 13 and 15 the Respondent induced
and encouraged a work stoppage by employees of NBC who were
assigned to work in Studio 3A. Whether or not the introduction of
teleprompter equipment into Studio 3A in fact created hazardous or
'difficult working conditions for members of the Respondent employed
in such studio is immaterial here, for the Respondent offered no evi-
dence,'' nor does the record otherwise show, that the purpose of such
work stoppage was to correct those alleged hazardous working con-
ditions. On the co ltrary, ti ecord convinces us that there'is reason-
able cause to believe that the work stoppage a.tl BC was designed, in
violation of Section 8 (b) (4) (D), solely to compel Teleprompter to
assign work to NABET members rather than to their own employees
who were members of another union. We find therefore that the dis-
pute is properly before us. -
e. Merits of the-dispute
As indicated above, the Respondent concedes that it has no existing
contract with Teleprompter upon which could be predicated any law-
ful claim'to the work in dispute and that it represents none of Tele-
prompter's employees. Nor-does it appear that.the Respondent has
any right to any outstanding Board certif caton:or order affecting this
work.15 It is clear from the record that Teleprompter had,assigned
the work in question to its own employees who were members,of Local
No. 1.
"Middle States Telephone Company of Illinoi8, "91 NERB-. 598, and cases .-cited therein
in footnote 16.
114n officer of Respondent and certain of its members were subpoenaed by the General'
Counsel to testify at the hearing , but on advice of Respondent 's counsel , the members,
who were present, refused to do so.
15 Section 8 (b)-, (4) (D) contains the proviso ° ... unless such employer is failing to
conform to any order o r certification of.the Board determining the bargaining representa-
tive for employees perl&ming such wo k. .. .11 -
NATIONAL ASSOC. OF BROADCAST ENGINEERS AND TECHNICIANS 1479
These facts are determinative of the present dispute. The Board
has specifically held that Sections 8 (b) (4) (D) and 10 (k) do not
deprive an employer of the right-to assign work to his own employees
and that these sections were not intended to interfere with an em-
ployer's freedom to hire, subject only to the requirement against dis-
crimination as contained in Section 8 (a) (3) 16 Consequently in
determining this dispute, it is sufficient on the facts before us that
Teleprompter assigned the work to its own employees and that Re-
spondent acted to force or require Teleprompter to assign this work
to its own members.
That there has been no work stoppage by NBC employees since
February 20 does not eliminate the necessity for a determination of
the dispute, for we find nothing in the record to indicate that the Re-
spondent has abandoned its claimed right to ,an, assignment of the
work and that it will not. in the future take similar action to force
or require Teleprompter to assign the work to its own members.
Moreover, the record shows that Teleprompter's future business oper-
ations depend, in part, upon a final resolution of this dispute. Under
the circumstances we cannot find that the present proceeding is moot.
Accordingly,-we find that the Respondent, NABET, is not lawfully
entitled to force or require Teleprompter Service Corp. and Tele-,
prompter Equipment Corp. to assign.the work in the dispute to mem-
bers of NABET rather than to employees of Teleprompter.
Determination of Dispute
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the en-
tire record in this case, the Board makes the following determination
of dispute pursuant to Section 10 (k) of the amended Act :
1. National Association of Broadcasting Engineers and Technicians,
Independent, and its agents are not, and have not been, lawfully
entitled to force or require Teleprompter Service Corp. and Tele
prompter Equipment Corp. to assign the work of operating tele-
prompter equipment in Studio 3A of the National Broadcasting
Company, New York, New York, to members of National Association
of Broadcasting Engineers and Technicians, Independent, rather than
to employees of Teleprompter Service Corp. and Teleprompter Equip-
ment Corp., who are, or may be, members of another labor organi-
zation.
2. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision and Determination
of Dispute, the Respondent shall notify the Regional Director for the
1e Juneau Spruce Corporation , 82 NLRB 650; United Brotherhood of Carpenters and
Joiners of America, et al. (Stroh Brewery Company ), 88 NLRB 844.
1480 DECISIONS OF ' NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Second Region in writing as to what steps the Respondent has taken
to comply with the terms of the Decision and Determination of
Dispute.
LOCAL 428 , UNITED ASSOCIATION OF JOURNEYMEN AND APPRENTICES OF'
THE PLUMBING AND PIPEFITTING INDUSTRY OF THE UNITED STATES
AND CANADA , A. F. L., AND BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES
COUNCIL OF PHILADELPHIA AND VICINITY and NICHOLAS PALLADINO,-
CHARLES PALLADINO , FRED PALLADINO , WILLIAM PALLADINO, AND,
FRANK PALLADINO , INDIVIDUALLY AND AS CO-PARTNERS , TRADING AS
N. PALLADINO BROTHERS . Case No. 4-CB-63. August 30, 1951
Decision and Order
On March 9, 1951, Trial Examiner C.V. Whittemore issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
Respondents had engaged in and were engaging in certain unfair labor
practices, and recommending that they cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of the Inter-
mediate Report attached hereto. Thereafter, the Respondents filed
exceptions to the Intermediate Report, and a supporting brief, and
the General Counsel filed a brief.
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-mem-
ber panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Murdock].
The Respondents' requestfor oral argument is denied, as the record
and briefs, in our opinion, adequately present the issues and positions
of the parties.
The Board has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner at
the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The
rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Inter-
mediate Report, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the,
case. We find merit in the Respondents' contention that the Board, in
the exercise of its discretion, should decline to assert jurisdiction in
this case.
Palladino, the charging party and the employer of the employees
involved herein, is engaged in the plumbing and heating business
in Pottstown, Pennsylvania, and does an annual gross business of
approximately $138,000, all of which is local. Palladino's annual
purchases-amount to approximately $73,500, of which purchases worth
approximately $10,800 are shipped directly to Palladino from outside
the State. Palladino was hired as a subcontractor to install the plumb-
ing and heating system in a supermarket being constructed for Ameri-
95 NLRB No. 208.