North Middledale Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 28, 1980

253 N.L.R.B. 481 (N.L.R.B. 1980)

NORTH MIDDLEDALE CORP.
North Middledale Corp. and Local 307, SEIU. Case
AO-227
November 28, 1980
ADVISORY OPINION
BY CHAIRMAN FANNING AND MEMBERS
JENKINS, PENELLO, TRUESDAI.E
The petition herein was filed on October 7, 1980,
by North Middledale Corp., herein called the Peti-
tioner, pursuant to Sections 102.98 and 102.99 of
the National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations, Series 8, as amended, seeking an advi-
sory opinion regarding Board jurisdiction.
In pertinent part, the petition alleges as follows:
(1) Currently pending before the New York
State Labor Relations Board are two proceedings,
Docket Nos. SU-53064 and SU-53065, presumably
filed by Local 307, SEIU, herein called the Union,
in which the Petitioner has been charged with en-
gaging in unfair labor practices arising from dis-
criminatory discharges motivated by alleged union
activity.
(2) The Petitioner is engaged in the business of
managing apartment house complexes. In addition
to its responsibilities for collecting rents, maintain-
ing and repairing apartments, and maintaining
grounds, it functions as owner of the properties as
it assumes all responsibility for profit and loss. It
presently manages three such complexes compris-
ing 18 buildings in Nassau and Suffolk Counties,
Long Island, New York, which yield gross rev-
enues of approximately $790,000 per year. During
the year ending May 30, 1980, the Petitioner pur-
chased locally gas and electricity totaling $56,436,
oil totaling $130,248, and supplies and materials
used for maintenance and repair totaling $57,000. It
believes that an indeterminate proportion of the
goods purchased were manufactured outside the
State of New York. On the basis of the above, the
Petitioner submits that the Board has jurisdiction
over its operations.
3. The Union, which does not contest Board ju-
risdiction, neither admits nor denies the foregoing
commerce data. The State Board has made no find-
ings with respect thereto.
4. There is no representation or unfair labor
practice proceeding involving this labor dispute
presently pending before the Board.
5. Although served with a copy of the Petition
for advisory opinion, none of the parties filed a re-
sponse thereto as permitted by the Board's Rules
and Regulations.
On the basis of the foregoing, the Board is of the
opinion that:
1. The Petitioner is engaged in the business of
managing apartment house complexes in Nassau
and Suffolk Counties, Long Island, New York.
2. The Petitioner contends that the Board should
assert jurisdiction over its operations citing the
Board precedents in James Johnston Property Man-
agement, 221 NLRB 301 (1975), Adelsberg & Co.,
225 NLRB 952 (1976), and Henry R. Mandel d/b/a
Mandel Management Company, Managing Agent for
Greenwich Village Community Housing Corp., 229
NLRB 1121 (1977), where jurisdiction was asserted
over property managing employers each of whom
derived an annual gross revenue of $500,000 or
more. As indicated above, the Petitioner derives in
excess of $500,000 annually from its management of
its apartment complexes and, therefore, meets the
monetary standard set forth in the above-cited pre-
cedents. Assuming that an indeterminate proportion
of its purchases were of goods manufactured out-
side the State of New York and were more than de
minimis, the Board's statutory jurisdiction over the
Petitioner would also be established.
Accordingly, the parties are advised, under Sec-
tion 102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations,
Series 8, as amended, that, based upon the allega-
tions herein, the Board would assert jurisdiction
over the operations of the Petitioner with respect
to labor disputes cognizable under Sections 8, 9,
and 10 of the Act.
253 NLRB No. 60
481