Arthur Murray Dance Studios

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 30, 1952

100 N.L.R.B. 1303 (N.L.R.B. 1952)

ARTHUR MURRAY DANCE STUDIOS 1303
The Employer does not except to the Regional Director's findings
concerning Diantha Whittaker's duties and responsibilities, but chal-
lenges his conclusion that she is not a confidential employee. How-
ever, as it does not appear that the alleged confidential matters handled
by Diantha Whittaker relate to the general labor relations policy of
the Employer, or that this employee acts in a confidential capacity to
one who formulates or effectuates the Employer's general labor policy,
it is well established, as the Regional Director found, that she is not a
confidential employee.' And we find no merit in the Employer's chal-
lenge to existing Board criteria for determining the confidential status
of an employee.
Accordingly, we shall order that the ballot of Diantha Whittaker be
opened and counted.
Direction
IT IS HEREBY DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain
representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the
Employer, the Regional Director for the Twenty-first Region shall,
pursuant to National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations,
within ten (10) days from the date of this Direction, open and count
the ballots of Beatrice Campbell, Florence E. Hansen, and Diantha
Whittaker; and thereafter prepare and cause to be served upon the
parties a supplemental tally of ballots, including therein the count of
the ballots described above.
5 The Muller Company, Ltd, 98 NLRB 737; Wilson & Co, Inc, 97 NLRB 1388.
ETHEL FISTERE, AN INDIVIDUAL T/A ARTHUR MURRAY DANCE STUDIOS;
FISTERE INCORPORATED OF ALIJXANDRIA , VIRGINIA , D/B/A ARTHUR
MURRAY DANCE STUDIOS ; FISTERE INCORPORATED OF ARLINGTON, VIR-
GINIA, D/B/A ARTHUR MURRAY DANCE STUDIOS ; FISTERE INCORPO-
RATED OF SILVER SPRING, MARYLAND , D/B/A ARTHUR MURRAY DANCE
STUDIOS 1 and WASHINGTON ASSOCIATION OF DANCE INSTRUCTORS,
PETITIONER . Case No. 5-RC-1083 . September 30, 1952
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 Henry L. Segal, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
I The names of the Employers appear as amended at the bearing.
100 NLRB No. 212.
1304 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. • At the hearing, the
Employers moved to dismiss the petition upon the ground that they
were not engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. For the
reasons given below, the motion is hereby denied 2
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 Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. Ethel Fistere, an individual t/a Arthur Murray Dance Studios,
operates a dance instruction studio in Washington, D. C. Fistere
Incorporated of Alexandria, Virginia, Fistere Incorporated of
Arlington, Virginia, and Fistere Incorporated of Silver Spring,
Maryland, operate dance instruction studios in Alexandria, Virginia,
Arlington, Virginia, and Silver Spring, Maryland, respectively.
Ethel Fastere, in addition to being the sole proprietor of the Washing-
ton studio, is also the only stockholder in the three corporations, all
of which have the same set of officers. Ethel Fistere is president,
her lawyer is secretary, and the manager of the Washington studio is
vice president.
All 4 studios are operated under a license agreement between Ethel
Fistere and Arthur Murray, Inc., of New York City, which grants
her the sole right to the use of the name and teaching methods of
Arthur Murray in the District of Columbia and the surrounding area.
Arthur Murray, Inc., operates 1 studio in New York and licenses about
200 others throughout the United States. In exchange for her
franchise, Mrs. Fistere, as do other licensees, pays Murray a royalty
of 10 percent of gross receipts. In 1951, these receipts for all 4
studios amounted to approximately $710,000.
The Employers are required to keep their books open for inspection
by Murray, and to remit weekly to Murray "a full and accurate state-
ment showing the gross receipts received by the Licensee during the
preceding week together with the- names of dancing pupils enrolled
during said week, with complete details of their enrollment, and the
amounts paid to the Licensee by dancing pupils for lessons during that
week. . . ." Under the license agreement, when a student con-
2 After the hearing , the Petitioner moved to correct certain errors in the transcript The
Employers object not to the accuracy of the suggested corrections , but to alleged technical
defects in the service of the motion papers . We find no merit in the Employers ' objections.
The motion to correct the transcript is hereby granted.
The Employers also object to consideration of the Petitioner ' s brief upon the ground
that it was not filed on time , that it was not legibly printed , and that the certificate of
service states that a copy will be mailed to the Employers instead of that it had been
mailed The Board's records show that a typewritten copy of the brief was received
within the time allowed therefor and that additional time was given the Petitioner to
replace the typewritten brief with a printed one, which it has done . The affidavit of
service, although defective , has not prejudiced the Employers. The Employers do not
deny receiving a copy of the brief. The objections to the receipt of the Petitioner 's brief
are hereby overruled.
ARTHUR MURRAY DANCE STUDIOS 1305
tracts for dancing lessons in one Arthur, Murray studio and then
moves to another location., -the Arthur Murray studio at the second
location is obligated to complete the pupil's lessons under the contract
with the first studio. For these lessons, the second studio receives a
fixed amount of $2 per hour.
The Employers discount notes received from pupils unable to pay
cash with the Educational Credit Bureau located in Kansas City,
Missouri. Although she does not pay any part of the expense of
Murray's national advertising, when a Murray national television
show originates in Washington, D. C., Mrs. Fistere pays a share of
the costs, although not required to do so. Mrs. Fistere also volun-
tarily requests advice from the Murray advertising agency in New
York in connection with local advertising. During the past 2 or 3
years, the Employers have purchased instructional material from
Murray in New York valued at not more than $2,000.
From time to time, conventions are held among Murray licensees
to discuss methods and procedures.
Upon these facts, the Board finds that the Employers' 3 operations
affect commerce within the meaning of the Act, and that it will ef-
fectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction 4
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain
employees of the Employers.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employers within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks to represent dance instructors at all four
studios of the Employers in a single unit. Alternatively, it is pre-
pared to accept single studio units. The Employers contend that
employees at each studio should constitute separate appropriate units.
As stated above, Mrs. Fistere is the sole proprietor of the Washing-
ton studio and the only stockholder in, and the president of, the three
corporations operating studios in nearby Virginia and Maryland.
She is also the director of all four studios. The managers of the
corporation studios report directly to the manager of the Washington
studio.
Most dance instructors for the corporation studios are hired at the
Washington studio, where they are also trained in Arthur Murray
methods. The dance director at the Washington studio also visits the
suburban studios to give advanced training to newly hired dance in-
structors. There is some interchange of instructors among the studios.
S As found infra, the four Employers constitute a single employer within the meaning
of the Act.
4 The Borden Company , Southern Division, 91 NLRB 628 ; Baxter Bros , 91 NLRB 1480.
The Board , of course , has plenary jurisdiction over that part of the Employers ' business
located in the District of Columbia . Roy C. Kelley, 95 NLRB 6.
1306 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Meetings of dance instructors at all four studios are held weekly at the
Washington studio. Attendance is compulsory and three unexcused
absences are cause for dismissal. Instructors in all four studios have
the same pay rates and enjoy the same employee benefits.
Although separate records are kept for the four studios, bookkeep-
ing is centralized at the Washington studio. .
We find that the three corporations and Ethel Fistere constitute a
single employer within the meaning of the Act .5 In view of the geo-
graphic proximity of the four studios, the interchange of studio per-
sonnel, the centralized, control, and the general uniformity of working
conditions, we further find that a unit of employees at the four studios
is appropriate.
We find that all dance instructors, including analysts, at the Em-
ployers' Washington, D. C., Arlington and Alexandria, Virginia, and
Silver Spring, Maryland, dance instruction studios, excluding inter-
viewers, trainee instructors,6 unit heads, department heads, assistant
managers, managers, owners, and any 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 parties agree that regular part-time instructors should be
permitted to vote. They are in disagreement , however, as to instruc-
tors in training who also regularly work part time as paid instructors.
The Petitioner would deny them, the Employers would grant them,
the right to vote. In view of the fact that these individuals regularly
work substantial hours each week as paid instructors, we find that, like
other part-time instructors, they are eligible to vote.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
Bolton & Hay, 100 NLRB 381, and cases cited therein.
9 The parties agree to the exclusion of trainee instructors who are undergoing training,
but are not paid and are not considered employees of the Employers.
POLLOCK PAPER CORPORATION and DALLAS PRINTING SPECIALISTS AND
PAPER PRODUCTS UNION NO. 525, PETITIONER
POLLOCK PAPER CORPORATION and DALLAS PRINTING SPECIALISTS AND
PAPER PRODUCTS UNION No. 525, PETITIONER . Cases Nos. 16-RC-
1095'and 16-RC-1096. September 30, 1950
Decision and Direction of Elections
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
Edwin Youngblood, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings
100 NLRB No. 214.