Local 282, Int'l Brotherhood of Teamsters, Etc.

956 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD P. 1147,11.22-23, change "was being sent to the" to "should be sent to the". P. 1147,1.24, change "to ILO" to "the Board". P. 1148, 1. 14, change "it is too late" to "it is probably late". P. 1148, 1. 22, change "have rules at that time one one or" to "have ruled at that time one way or". P. 1149,1. 16, change "copy was being sent" to "copy should be sent". P. 1150, 1. 13, change "he was sending copy" to "we sent a copy". P. 1152,1.25, change "sent a" to "said to send". P. 115 14, change "sent copy" to "said to send copy". P. 1155,1.9, change "RM and LMB" to "RM and FAB". P. 1182, 1. 4, change "litigate an 8(a)(5) charge" to "litigate a general 8(a)(5) charge". P. 1189, 1. 16, change "to the lawyers have any objection?" to "do the lawyers have any objection?". P. 1197,1. 24, change "car check" to "card check P. 1204,11. 15, 17, 18, 22 and 23, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1205,11. 10, 12, 16, 18, 20 and 23, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1206, 1. 10, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1206,1. 24, change "Brazeaus" to "Braseau's". P. 1207,11. 7, 13, 14 and 20, change "Brazeau",to "Braseau". P. 1208,1. 22, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1209,11. 18, 20 and 20-21, change `Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1210,11.5 and 7, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1210, 1. 19, change "for a board" to "for an on board". P. 1210,1. 22, change "of aboard gang" to "of an on board gang". P. 1211,1. 12, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1217,1. 9, change "39-A" to "29-A". P. 1220,1. 4, change "Brazeau's" to "Braseau's". P. 1220,1. 12, change "Nrazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1220,1.21, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1222,1. 4, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1233,11. 13 and 20, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1234,11. 5, 11, 13, 14 and 16, change "Brazeau" to "Braseau". P. 1237,1. 20, add "Roura" after "Rodriguez Diaz or". P. 1238, 1. 8, change "Mr. Montero" to "Mr. Bailey". P. 1238,1. 25, change "after July 30, on" to "after July 30?". P. 1239,1. 14, change "Mr. Duer" to "Mr. Duen". P. 1239, 1. 17, change "does German" to "does Bonano". P. 1242,1. 6, change "a letter headed" to "a letterhead of". P. 1243,1.22, change "Mr. Duer" to "Mr. Duen". P. 1244, 1. 4, change "Mr. Duer" to "Mr. Duen". P. 1247,1. 23, change "July 26" to "July 31". P. 1248, 11. 12-13, change "that it applied in or" to "that they applied for in or". P. 1249, 1. 4, change "that he had objected to any" to "that he would object to any". Local 282, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America and United States Trucking Corporation. Case No. 2-CC-764. April 20, 1964 DECISION AND ORDER On charges duly filed October 11, 1962, by United States Trucking Corporation, the General Counsel for the National Labor Relations Board issued a complaint dated November 8, 1962, against Local 282, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, alleging that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce 146 NLRB No. 112. LOCAL 2 s 2, -INT'L - BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS ; ETC. 957 within the meaning of Secti6n -8(b) (4),(i) and (ii) (B) of the Na- tional Labor Relations Act, as amended. Copies of the complaint and notice of hearing'were duly served upon the Respondent and the Charging Party. The Respondent filed an answer to- the complaint denying commission of the alleged unfair labor practices. The hearing was held on,this complaint on January 30 and 31, 1963, before Trial Examiner Charles W. Whittemore., At the hearing .the parties stipulated 'that testimony adduced at- hearings in certain related proceedings 1 would constitute testimony before the Trial Ex- aminer and the Board in the instant proceeding. Certain exhibits and the formal papers in these proceedings were also made part of the record. Thereafter the Charging Party, Respondent, and the Gen- eral Counsel by stipulation agreed to waive the issuance of an Inter- mediate Report and Recommended Order, including the making of findings of fact and conclusions of law by the Trial Examiner, and to submit the case directly to the Board. On February 15, 1963, the Board issued an order approving stipulation and transferring case to the Board. The Board fixed the time for the filing of briefs and thereafter each of the parties filed briefs in support of its contentions. With respect to the unfair labor practices, the complaint alleges in- substance that the Respondent through its agents made threats to rep- resentatives of Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., and Concrete Construction Cor- poration that it would take its members off the trucks of the Colonial Sand and Stone Company, Inc., thereby stopping delivery of needed building materials and closing down the construction project; and induced one of its members, a Colonial driver, to withhold unloading a truckload of sand, all with an object of forcing the various contrac- tors named below to cease doing business with each other and with United States Trucking Corporation. It further ' alleged that this conduct was engaged in to further a demand upon United States Trucking Corporation that it recognize the Respondent as represent- ing the five employees of that company driving cement tank trucks to the building site at which the, contractors were performing their services. It is alleged that this conduct was in violation of Section 8 (b) (4) (1) and (ii) (B) of the Act. • Upon the basis of the foregoing stipulations and the entire record in this case, including the charge, the complaint, answer, and briefs, the Board 2 makes the following : 1 These were a Section 10(1) Injunction hearing before Judge Archie O . Dawson, on November 9, 1962, in Case No. 62 Civil 3630 , New York District Court, Southern District ; and the first .2 days of a 3-day 10(k) hearing held January 14, 15, and 16, 1963, before Hearing Officer Carl Coben' in Case No. 2-CD-256. 2Pursuant 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 McCulloch and Members Leedom' and -Fanning]. 958 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANIES INVOLVED The United States Trucking Corporation, herein called U.S. Truck- ing, is a New York corporation with its principal office and place of business in New York City. It is engaged in providing general truck- ing services. During the year preceding the hearings, which period is representative of its annual operations generally, U.S. Trucking in the course and conduct of its business purchased and caused to be transported and delivered to its places of business in the State of New York from points outside the State, trucks and truck parts and other goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000. During the same period, it performed services valued in excess of $1,000,000, of which, services valued at $50,000 were performed for various enter- prises located in States other than the State of New York. Universal Atlas Cement Division of United States Steel Corpora- tion, herein called Universal Atlas, is a New Jersey corporation with its principal office and place of business in New York City. It is en- gaged in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of cement and re- lated products for the construction industry. During the year preced- ing the hearings, the company in the course and conduct of its business operations manufactured, sold, and distributed from its plants in New York, products valued in excess of $50,000 in interstate commerce di- rectly to States of the United States other than the State of New York. Colonial Sand And Stone Company, Inc., herein called Colonial, is a New York corporation with its principal office and place of business in New York City. It is engaged in the sale and distribution at whole- sale of building construction materials, such as sand, gravel, and related products. During the year preceding the hearings, Colonial, in the course and conduct of its business operations, sold and dis- tributed from its places of business, products valued in excess of $50,000, of which products valued in excess of $50,000 were shipped from such places of business in interstate commerce directly to States of the United States other than the State of origin. Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., herein called Blitz, is a New York corporation maintaining its principal office and place of business in New York City. It is engaged in performing general contracting and related services in the -building and construction industry. During the year preceding the hearings, Blitz, in the course ,and conduct of its business operations, performed services in excess of $1,000,000 of which services valued in excess of $50,000 were performed in and for various enter- prises located in States other than the State wherein it is located. LOCAL 282, INT'L BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, ETC. 959 Concrete Construction Corporation, herein called Concrete Con- struction, is a New York corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Joseph P. Blitz, Inc. It is engaged in concrete construction work and related services. During the year preceding the hearings, Con- crete'Construction, in the course and conduct of its business opera- tions, performed services valued in excess of $50,000, of which, services valued in excess of $50,000 were furnished to Blitz and other enter- prises, each of which annually performs services valued in excess of $50,000 outside the State. The parties agree, and have so stipulated, that all the corporations herein are, and have been at all times material herein, engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. We also find that each of the above-named corporations is, and at all time material herein has been, a person engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) of the Act. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Local 282, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, is, and at all times material herein has been, a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES Blitz was engaged, under an agreement with the Department of Public Works of New York City, as the general contractor to construct a sanitation plant and garage for the Department of Sanitation of New York City at 58th Street and 42nd Avenue in Maspeth, Queens, New York, herein called the Maspeth job. Concrete Construction was engaged by Blitz to perform various concrete construction services at the job. Colonial was engaged by Concrete Construction to pro- vide building materials, including sand, gravel, aggregate, and cement, and to perform certain related functions at the job 3 Universal Atlas was engaged by Colonial to provide bulk cement and to perform various services at the jobsite. U.S. Trucking was engaged by Uni- versal Atlas to provide various services, including the transportation of bulk cement 4 from one of its places of business at Glen Cove, Long Island, herein called the Glen Cove facility to the Maspeth job. $ Colonial drivers who delivered building materials to the jobsite were members of the Respondent and were covered under the Ready-Mix Concrete, Sand, Gravel, and Asphalt, 1961-63 contract with Colonial. U.S. Trucking is engaged in providing a broad range of general trucking services. It has 1 ,800 to 2,000 employees who are represented by several different craft unions. Five of these employees drive cement-carrying tank trucks and are covered under the General Trucking Agreement between Teamsters Local 807 and U.S. Trucking. 744-670-65-vol. 146---62 ;960 , DECISIONS- OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, _ _ : -On the morning of October 8, 1962, Vincent D'Ambrosio, business representative of Respondent,. spoke to John M. O'Sullivan, comp- troller of U.S.- Trucking, at the gate to the Glen Cove facility. D''Ambrosio told, O'Sullivan that the hauling of bulk cement was work that rightfully belonged to, Respondent, and not to Local,,807, .and that if U.S. Trucking wanted to continue to haul bulk cement, it would,have to sign a collective-bargaining agreement with Respond- ent covering its cement truck drivers. - , , .") I The next morning, October 9, 1963, Thomas Siblo, a U.S. Trucking employee, drove a U.S. Trucking'tank truck with a load of bulk ce- ment to the Maspeth jobsite. At the site, Leo Pernicano, job superin- tendent for Cement Construction,5',told Siblo to pull his truck over to the side and wait. While Siblo awaited permission to unload the ce- ment, three business agents of Respondent-John` -Cody, John O'Rourke, and McElligot-told Pernicano, Walter Tapman, project manager for Blitz, and Julius Nasso, president of Concrete Construc- tion, that Respondent's agents had followed the truckload of cement to the jobsite and that they claimed this work. He further stated that 'Concrete Construction and Blitz should not dump the cement because if either of those companies accepted the delivery of the bulk cement from U.S. Trucking, Respondent's business agents would pull their drivers off the Colonial trucks which were then delivering sand. Pernicano asked the business agents to do him a favor and let him ac- ,cept the load of cement from Siblo because he needed it, but Respc•id- ent's business agents replied that they could not do that since it was a Local 282 job. Pernicano then told Siblo that he could not accept the truckload of cement because if he did, the Respondent's agents would shut down the job. About the same time Respondent's business agent Cody approached a Colonial driver, Albert Cutrona, who was waiting to unload a load of sand and gravel from a Colonial truck he had driven to the Maspeth ,jobsite. Cody told Cutrona to hold up dumping the sand. About a half hour later, when it came time for Cutrona to dump the sand and gravel from his truck, he held up doing so for about 15 minutes until he received word from Cody that it was all right to unload. During the period of time that Cutrona refused to unload his truck, Pernicano telephoned Colonial and told a Colonial dispatcher that Respondent's business agents had stopped Colonial trucks from dumping the sand aid gravel because the U.S. Trucking truck was in the yard. Siblo similarly telephoned U.S. Trucking and told his,superiors of the stoppage. 5 Job Superintendent Pernicano supervises about 200 men, including foremen, and is in complete charge of the job for Concrete Construction . He has the right to hire and fire and determine how many people should be hired , and schedules the work. In view of the foregoing, he is a "person" within the meaning of Section 8(b) (4) (ii ) of the Act. Carolina Lumber Company, 130 NLRB 1438, 1443. LOCAL 282c INT'L BROTHERHOOD)*0F TEAMSTERS, ETC . 961 Shortly thereafter, George- Lauricella, a, representative from-Colo- nial, arrived at the, site and spoke to the three Respondent's business :agents and then to Pernicano: . He told Pernicano not to accept the cement. Thereupon, Pernicano, again told Siblo that he could not ac- cept the load of cement because if he, did,,the three Respondent busi- ness agents would stop the job. - Siblo and Pernicano thereafter waited until O'Sullivan arrived at the jobsite. By that time, Lauricella and Respondent's three business agents had left the jobsite. Pernicano told O'Sullivan that he could not accept the U.S. Trucking load of cement since if he did the sand and gravel would not be unloaded. Just before noon that same day,,October 9,'Adams, the president of U.S. Trucking, telephoned Anthony Duffy, secretary-treasurer of Re- sspondent. Adams told Duffy that he was tied up-at the Maspeth job, explaining that Respondent's business agents had prevented a U:S. Trucking driver from unloading cement at the Maspeth site and that they had also warned Colonial that Colonial drivers wouldn't dump sand and gravel if Colonial received any cement from U.S. Trucking. At Adams' request, Duffy agreed to see what he could do. About 4:45 p.m. that same day, Duffy called Adams back and told him that "noth- ing could be done, the job was down and he would have to sign a con- tract with 282." Duffy testified at the hearing that Respondent sought and is seeking a 'contract between U.S. Trucking and Respondent cover- ing U.S. Trucking's cement truck drivers, ,and that once the contract was signed the U.S. Trucking cement drivers would be "transferred" from membership in Local 807 into membership in Respondent. After October 9, no further deliveries were requested of U.S. Truck- ing for the Maspeth job, and none was made. The facts are not in issue.' They clearly demonstrate that Respond- ent, through its business agents, threatened representatives of Blitz and Concrete Construction to close down the entire construction proj- ect in furtherance of the Respondent's demands for a contract with U.S. Trucking. It is equally clear that Respondent, through its busi- ness agent, Cody, induced an employee of another neutral, Colonial, to cease work in order to accomplish the same objective. Thus the facts establish t'he necessary elements of violations by the Respondent rof Section 8 (b) (4) (i) and (ii) (B). The Respondent defends its activities herein under attack, as lawful, ,on the asserted ground that such activities were in furtherance of two primary objectives. One objective-according to its contention-was to represent all employees engaged in the trucking of bulk cement in the Metropolitan New York area so that' Respondent might' better safeguard the standards.established for employees it already repre- e In submitting this case to the Board the parties stipulated , that no issue of .fact exists 'herein. 962 . DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD sented under contract.. The Respondent asserts that it made its de- mand on U.S. Trucking for recognition and a contract in support of that objective. The second objective, according to the Respondent's claim, was to further a primary dispute it had with Colonial. -It con- tends that its activities with respect to Colonial consituted an effort to enforce a subcontracting clause in its contract with theCompany. This clause provides : Additional equipment maybe hired only if all the Employer's own equipment of the same type which is available for use is being operated by employees of the Employer. Assuming arguendo that Respondent's ultimate objective was, as it contends, to represent the drivers of all cement carrying trucks in the Metropolitan New York area and that its demands upon U.S. Truck- ing were motivated by that purpose, and further assuming that this gave rise to a legitimate primary dispute with U.S. Trucking, such as- sumptions are beside the point so far as the Respondent's conduct here- in complained of is concerned. The existence of such a primary dis- pute did not privilege the Respondent to seek to accomplish its goal through secondary pressures directed at neutral employers. It is clear from the evidence that the means used by Respondent to achieve its objective-the imposition of economic pressure directed against other and neutral employers so that they in turn might bring economic pres- sure to bear on U.S. Trucking to,force and require it to recognize the Respondent-constituted conduct proscribed by Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (B) of theAct.7 , Nor can we accept as valid the Respondent's further contention that it was attempting to enforce the subcontracting clause in its contract with Colonial. That contention is factually at odds with its demand for recognition made upon U.S. Trucking; a demand that persisted at least up to the hearing in this case. It is also irreconcilable with the statement made by Respondent's secretary-treasurer, Duffy, to Adams on October 9, and confirmed by Duffy's testimony at the hearing, that to avert the tieup at the Maspeth job U.S. Trucking would have to sign a contract with Respondent and have the membership of its cement truck drivers "transferred" from Local 807 to the Respondent. These facts leave no doubt that the Respondent was not concerned with en- forcing the contractual rights of Colonial's drivers or with preserving work in the Colonial bargaining unit, but rather with compelling U.S. Trucking, another employer, to recognize and bargain with Respond- ent as the representative of the latter's cement truck drivers, and re- quire such drivers to become members of its labor organization. Such T Building and Construotion Trades Council o f Tampa and Vicinity, AFL-CIO, et at. (Tampa Sa,id and Material Co.), 132 NLRB 1564, 1566-1567, 1568, 1569 ; International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers (Insul-Coustic Corpora- tion), 139 NLRB 659, 660-661. LOCAL 282, INT'L BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, ETC. 963 an objective, when sought to be achieved by the secondary pressures herein involved, is, of course, clearly interdicted by Section 8 (b) (4) (B) of the Act 8 In all the above circumstances, therefore, we find that the Respond= ent, by its acts and conduct, has violated Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (B) of the Act.' IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE ON COMMERCE The conduct of the Respondent occurring in connection with the operations of Blitz, Concrete Construction, Colonial, Universal Atlas, and U.S. Trucking, as set forth above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States, and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing the free flow of. commerce. THE REMEDY Having found that Respondent has engaged in unfair labor prac- tices in violation of Section 8(b) (4) (i ) and (ii) (B) of the Act, we shall order that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirma- tive action to remedy the unfair labor practices and otherwise effec- tuate the policies of the Act. In his brief, the General Counsel contends that, because of the nature of the violation involved and because ,of the Respondent Union's demonstrated proclivity for engaging in secondary boycott activities in furtherance of its labor disputes,1° a broad order against , it, , is necessary in order to prevent it from continuing with impunity to violate the secondary boycott provisions of the Act. We agree that an order against the Respondent to cease and desist from secondary s Butchers' Union Local 568, Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, AFL-CIO, at al. (Monarch Building Maintenance Co), 134 NLRB 136, 137; International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers, AFL- (310, et al. (Speed Line Manufacturing Company, Inc.), 139 NLRB 688-690 Y The Respondent contends that it would not effectuate the purposes of the Act for the Board to continue to pursue this matter since the jurisdictional dispute over the cement hauling work has now been amicably settled in favor of the Respondent , citing Local 502, International Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers Union of America , AFL-CIO (Cement-Work, Inc.), 140 NLRB 694. That case, however, involved a charge of a viola- tion of Section 8(b) (2) and ( 1) (A) where the majority concluded the settlement of the dispute in favor of the respondent would provide a defense. The settlement of the juris- dictional dispute does not, however, provide a defense to unlawful secondary action by respondent in drawing neutral employers into a dispute not their own. Local 5, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO ( Arthur Venneri Company ), ' 137 NLRB 828, 881-832. Member Fanning does not regard the underlying dispute in this case as a jurisdictional dispute. 30 See Local 282, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America (Precon Trucking Corp., at al.), 139 NLRB 1077 ; Local 282, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauf eurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America ( Twin County Transit Mix, Inc.), 137 NLRB 858; Local 282, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America (J. J. White Ready Mix Concrete Corp.), 141 NLRB 424. 964 . DECISIONS- OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD activities against any person, in order to force such persons to cease doing business with U.S. Trucking or with any other primary em- ployers, is necessary because of the extent to which the Respondent, in the past, has deliberately engaged in such unlawful secondary activities." CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Blitz, Concrete Construction Corp., Colonial, Universal Atlas, and U.S. Trucking are engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. -2. Respondent Local 282, International, Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, is a labor organi- zation within the meaning of the Act. 3. Respondent, by causing and threatening to cause work stoppages with an object of (1) forcing Blitz, Concrete Construction, Colonial, and Universal Atlas to cease doing business with U.S. Trucking, and (2) forcing U.S. Trucking to recognize it as the bargaining repre- sentative, has' engaged in unfair. labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (B) of the Act. 4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. ORDER Upon the entire record in this case, and pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent Union, Local 282'. International Brotherhood of 'Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware- housemen and Helpers of America, its officers, agents, representatives, successors, and assigns, shall : . . 1. Cease and desist from : (a) Engaging in, or inducing or encouraging any individual em- ployed by Colonial Sand and Stone Company, Inc., Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., Concrete Construction Corporation, Universal Atlas Cement Division of United States Steel Corporation, or by any other employer, to engage in a strike or a refusal in the course of his employment to use, manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise -handle or work on 'any goods, articles, materials, or commodities, or to perform any services, 'where an object thereof is either (1) to force or require Colonial Sand and 'Stone- Company, Inc.,' Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., Con- crete Construction Corporation, Universal Atlas Cement Division -of u International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America et at (Overnite Transportation Cotnpany ), '130 NLRB 1007 ; Local Union 522, Lumber Drivers , etc. (Republic Wire Corporation ),, 129 NLRB 370, enfd . 294 F. 2d 811 (CA. 3) ; Brewery and Beer Distributor Divers, etc , Local 830 (Delaware Valley Beer Distributors-Association ), 125 NLRB 12 , enfd. 281 F. 2d '819 (C.A. 3). LOCAL 282, INT'L BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, ETC. 965, United States Steel Corporation, or any other employer or person, to cease doing business with United States Trucking Corporation, or any other employer or person, or (2) to force or require United States Trucking Corporation or any other employer to recognize or bargain with Respondent as the representative of any of its employees unless Respondent has been certified as the representative of such employees under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act. (b) Threatening, coercing, and restraining Colonial Sand and Stone- Company, Inc., Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., Concrete Construction Cor- poration, Universal Atlas Cement Division of United States Steel' Corporation or any other person, where an object thereof is either (1) to force or require Colonial Sand and Stone Company, Inc., Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., Concrete Construction Corporation, Universal Atlas Cement Division of United States Steel Corporation, or any other employer or person, to cease doing business with United States Trucking Corporation, or with any other employer or person, or (2) to force or require United States Trucking Corporation, or any other employer, to recognize or bargain with Respondent as the repre- sentative of any of its employees unless Respondent has been certified as the representative of such employees under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act. (a) Post at Respondent's business offices and meeting halls in New York, New York, copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." '2 Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Second Region, shall, after being duly signed by the Respondent's authorized representative, be posted by Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days there- after, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to its members are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (b) Sign and mail sufficient copies of said notice to the Regional Director for the .Second Region for posting by Colonial Sand and Stone Company, Inc., Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., Concrete Construction Corporation, Universal Atlas Cement Division of United States Steel Corporation, and United States Trucking Corporation, if willing, at all-locations where notices to their. employees are customarily posted. (c) Notify the aforesaid Regional Director, in writing, within 10 days from,the date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply-herewith. "In the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of Appeals, there shall be substituted for the words "A Decision and' Order " the words "A Decree, of the United States Court of Appeals , Enforcing an Order." 966 ,DECISIONS OF NATIONAL- LABOR RELATIONS BOARD - APPENDIX To ALL MEMBERS OF LOCAL 282, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA AND To ALL EMPLOYEES OF COLONIAL SAND AND STONE COMPANY, INC., JOSEPH P. BLITZ, INC., CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, UNIVERSAL ATLAS CEMENT DIVISION OF UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, AND UNITED STATES TRUCKING CORPORATION Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, we hereby notify you that: WE WILL NOT engage in, or induce or encourage any individual employed by Colonial Sand and Stone Company, Inc., Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., Concrete Construction Corporation, Universal Atlas Cement Division of United States Steel Corporation, or any other person, to engage in, a strike or a refusal in the course of his employment to use, manufacture, transport, process, or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities or 'to perform any-services, nor will we threaten, coerce, or re- strain Colonial Sand and Stone Company, Inc., Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., Concrete Construction Corporation, or any other person, where in either case an object thereof is to force or require Colonial Sand and Stone Company, Inc., Joseph P. Blitz, Inc., Concrete Construction Corporation, Universal Atlas Cement Division of United States Steel Corporation, or any other em- ployer' or person, either (1) to cease doing business with United States Trucking Corporation, or any other employer or person, or (2) to force or require United States Trucking Corporation, or any other employer, to recognize or bargain with us as their representative of any of their employees. LOCAL 282, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS , CHAUFFEURS , WAREHOUSE- MEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, Labor Organization. Dated------------ ---- By------------------------------------- (Representative ) (Title) , This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting, and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional Office, Squibb Building, 745 Fifth Avenue, New York, New York, METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 967 Telephone No. 751-5500, if they have any question concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and Insurance Workers International Union, AFL-CIO. Case No. 8-C,A-3338. April 20, 1964 DECISION AND ORDER On February 4, 1964, Trial Examiner Abraham H. Mailer issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Re- spondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices within the meaning of the Act and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Decision. Thereafter, Re- spondent filed exceptions to the Decision. 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 [Chairman McCulloch and Mem- bers Fanning and Brown]. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Trial Ex- aminer's Decision, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the case, andhereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommenda- tions of the Trial Examiner.' ORDER The Board adopts as its Order the Recommended Order of the Trial Examiner? i We note that in the representation proceeding herein, the Regional Director, in finding appropriate the scope of the unit in question , relied on the record of proceedings in an earlier case involving this Respondent (Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, 138 NLRB 565), which record, by stipulation of the parties , was incorporated in the record of the present proceeding and made a part thereof. The parties agreed that the factual and legal issues in the proceeding were essentially similar to those in the earlier case. In that case, in finding appropriate for collective-bargaining purposes a unit composed of debit agents limited to Respondent's district offices located in a separate and distinct geographic area, the Board relied among other elements on the facts that the agents in each district office were under the direct supervision of the district manager , that virtually no inter- change or other contact took place between agents of different districts and that each district office was a separate administrative entity through which Respondent conducted its business. In view of its earlier findings in the representation case, the Board sub- sequently found that the Respondent violated Section 8 (a) (5) by refusing to bargain with the union certified as the exclusive bargaining agent in such appropriate unit. See Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, 141 NLRB 337, enfd. 328 F. 2d 820 (C.A. 3). 2 The Recommended Order is hereby amended by substituting for the first paragraph therein the following paragraph: Upon the entire record in this case, and pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that Respondent, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, its officers, agents, suc- cessors, and assigns, shall: 146 NLRB No. 113.