The Metallic Lathers Union , Local 46

THE METALLIC LATHERS UNION, LOCAL 46 749 WE WILL NOT in any other manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce our employees in the exercise of their rights under Section 7 of the Act. COLONY FURNITURE Co., Employer. 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. If employees have any question concerning this notice or compliance with its pro- visions, they may communicate directly with the Board's Regional Office, 746 Federal Office Building, 167 North Main Street, Memphis, Tennessee, Telephone No. 534-3161. 'The Metallic Lathers Union of New York and Vicinity, Local 46 of The Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International Union, AFL-CIO and Slattery Contracting Co., Inc. 'The Metallic Lathers Union of New York and Vicinity , Local 46 of The Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International Union, AFL-CIO and George A. Fuller Company. Cases Nos. 2-CD- 928 and 2-CD-329. January 11, 1966 DECISION AND ORDER QUASHING NOTICE OF HEARING This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, following charges filed on March 5, 1965, by Slattery Contracting Co., Inc., herein called Slattery, and on March 16, 1965, by George A. Fuller Company, herein called Fuller, alleging violations of Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (D) by Respond- ent Local 46, Wood, Wire & Metal Lather International Union, AFL- CIO, herein called Local 46. On April 8, 1965, the Regional Director for Region 2 consolidated these cases and thereafter a duly scheduled hearing was held before Hearing Officer Alan H. Randall, on April 28 and 30 and May 3 and 4, 1965. Local 172, International Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers Union of America, AFL-CIO, herein called Laborers Local 172, Prefabricated Concrete, Inc., herein called Prefabricated, and Eastern Precast Concrete, Inc., herein called Eastern, were permitted to intervene as parties in interest to the proceeding. 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. Thereafter, Local 46 filed a brief which the Board has duly considered. The National Labor Relations Board has reviewed the rulings of the Hearing Officer made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error. The rulings are hereby affirmed. 156 NLRB No. 77. 750 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Upon the entire record, the Board makes the following findings : 1. As stipulated by the parties, Slattery is a New York corporation and Fuller is a New Jersey corporation with offices in the State of New York. Both are engaged as general contractors in the building and construction industry in the State of New York, and in the opera- tion of their businesses each annually receives in excess of $50,000 for services performed outside the State of New York. The parties con- cede and we find that Slattery and Fuller are each engaged in com- merce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 2. Local 46 and Laborers Local 172 are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act. 3. The dispute : A. The facts Local 46 represents construction employees in New York City and vicinity who handle steel reinforcing material used in making rein- forced concrete. They are responsible for two distinct operations : cutting and bending steel rods and then placing and tying such rods in forms or beds preparatory to the pouring of concrete. Increasingly, construction specifications have called for the use of concrete sections which are fabricated away from the site and are then delivered at the project ready for erection. This has resulted in a decrease in the amount of work available to Local 46 members and has prompted demands by Local 46 that the use of prefabricated concrete be dis- continued and that all reinforced concrete sections be made at the construction site, or, in the alternative, if prefabricated concrete be used, that it be made in New York City where Local 46 members would be employed at the yards producing the prefabricated material. Prefabricated is one of a number of companies, related through common ownership, which supply prefabricated concrete materials for use in New York City construction projects. Heretofore, Prefabri- cated and Precrete, Inc., a related company, had production facilities on Long Island. In November 1960, after a dispute with Local 46 over the employment of its members at their Long Island yards, Pre- fabricated and Precrete entered into agreements with Local 46 in which they agreed to give to Local 46 members the right to perform a portion of the work at their yards. Under the agreements, Local 46 members would perform all the cut and bend work, and a Local 46 member would be hired as a working foreman over all placing and tying work. The placing and tying work itself was performed by members of a New York City Laborers local. Six months later, the Union renewed its demand that its members perform all of the placing and tying work as well as the cut and bend work at the yards. Pre- THE METALLIC LATHERS UNION, LOCAL 46 751 fabricated and Precrete, Inc., brought charges against Local 46 under Section 8(b) (4) (D) of the Act and, in the ensuing Section 10(k) proceeding, the Board awarded the disputed placing and tying work to employees represented by the New York City Laborers' local.' The assignment of the cut and bend work to Local 46 was not in dispute. In August 1964, Prefabricated ceased operations at its Long Island yard. Its movable equipment was sold to a wholly owned subsidiary, Eastern, which commenced production of prefabricated concrete materials in September 1964, at a yard in Howell Township, New Jersey. Eastern's yard, being in New Jersey, is outside the territorial jurisdiction of Local 46, and Eastern's employees, whose rates of pay are less than those of Local 46 members, are represented by Laborers Local 172, which has intervened in this proceeding. Eastern's employ- ees do no cut and bend work. Instead, Eastern's requirements of rein- forcing steel are supplied by steel manufacturers and wholesalers, already cut and bent to specifications. After August 1964, Prefabri- cated continued to bid on contracts calling for prefabricated concrete, but subcontracted all or most of the actual fabrication to Eastern. The instant dispute arose at two construction projects in New York City where Prefabricated was a subcontractor for the delivery of prefabricated concrete materials. Slattery was the general contractor at one of the sites; Fuller at the other. Slattery first learned of pos- sible difficulties with Local 46 over the use of Prefabricated's con- crete productions on February 1, 1965, when it was told by a Local 46 business agent that he would not allow Prefabricated to "prefabricate the material off the site and bring it to the job and erect it." Ten days later, the business agent repeated the same threat to a Slattery rep- resentative and added the comment that Prefabricated "was over in Jersey using some crummy union ... [and] he wasn't going to allow work to be taken from the members of his local." Fuller first learned of possible difficulties with Local 46 on March 3, 1965, and was there- after told that the reason for the trouble was the use of "precast" on the job. On March 8, 1965, the Union ordered its members working for subcontractors responsible for onsite reinforced concrete construc- tion to walk off the job at both construction sites. They remained off the job until March 29, 1965, when they returned to work following the issuance of a temporary injunction against Local 46 by the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York pursuant to Section 10(1) of the Act. Slattery and Fuller have filed charges against Local 46 alleging violations of both Section 8 (b) (4) (B) and (D). Only the 8 (b) (4) (D) allegation is before us in this proceeding. ' Local 46, Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers International Union, AFL-CIO, et al. (Precrete, Inc.), 136 NLRB 1072. 752 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD B. The contentions of the parties By filing charges under Section 8 (b) (4) (D) of the Act, the Charg- ing Parties assert that a jurisdictional dispute exists within the mean- ing of the Act. At the hearing, counsel for Slattery took the position that any attempt by a union to force an employer to award particular work to members of a particular labor organization is such a dispute. Local 46 on the other hand, argues that no jurisdictional dispute exists within the meaning of the Act because there are no conflicting cl aims to particular work by rival employee groups. Local 46 also argues that the notice of hearing should be quashed because the parties have agreed to a private settlement of the dispute, but that if the Board asserts jurisdiction in the instant cases, the disputed work should be awarded to employees it represents rather than to employees represented by Laborers Local 172. Laborers Local 172 asserts that the disputed work should be awarded to its members. C. The applicability of the statute It is not clear from the record whether the object of Local 46's pressure against the Charging Parties was to force them to cease using any prefabricated concrete material, or whether it was to force them to put pressure on Prefabricated to resume operations in New York. We are not required in this proceeding to resolve this factual question because, whether Local 46's dispute was with the Charging Parties over the use of prefabricated material, or with Prefabricated over whether it should operate in New York or New Jersey, we do not believe that a jurisdictional dispute exists within the meaning of Section 8 (b) (4) (D) of the Act. The Charging Parties cannot claim to be in the predicament for which relief under Section 8 (b) (4) (D) was designed, namely, that of an employer caught between the conflicting claims of rival groups of employees for the assignment of work since, under either of the aforesaid objects, only the employee group represented by Local 46 is directly involved in the particular dispute arising from Local 46's demands against the Charging Parties that have led to this proceeding. Thus, if the dispute was essentially between Local 46 and the Charg- ing Parties over the use of prefabricated concrete materials, there is no jurisdictional dispute within the meaning of the Act .2 If, on the 2 See, e.g, Highway Truckdrivers & Helpers, Local 107, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Independent ( Safeway Stores, Incorporated), 134 NLRB 1320; Sheet Metal Workers International Association, Local Union No. 272 ; etc. (Valley Sheet Metal Company ), 136 NLRB 1402 ; Brotherhood of Teamsters and Auto Truck Drivers, Local 70, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeur8, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Independent (Hills Transportation Co ), 136 NLRB 1086 ; Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International Union, Local 328, AFL-CIO (Acoustics & Specialties, Inc ), 139 NLRB 598. MARINE COOKS AND STEWARDS UNION 753 other hand, the dispute was essentially between Local 46 and • Pre- fabricated over whether Prefabricated should operate in New York or in New Jersey, we arrive at the same conclusion for somewhat dif- ferent reasons. Local 46's complaint against Prefabricated was that it had changed its method of operations by moving to New Jersey with the effect of eliminating job opportunities for members of Local 46. A union's protest over such a change does not become a jurisdic- tional dispute simply because another group of employees is there- after obtained to do the work .8 To make relief available to employers under Section 8 (b) (4) (D) in such a situation would restrict unions from applying legitimate eco- nomic pressure in response to changes in production methods or to changes in location which employees believe are detrimental to their interests. Upon the basis of the foregoing, we conclude that Local 46's strike against subcontractors of the Charging Parties on March 8, 1965, did not violate Section 8(b) (4) (D) of the Act. The disputes herein are not, therefore, disputes within the meaning of Section 10 (k). Accord- ingly, we shall quash the notice of hearing.4 [The Board quashed the notice of hearing.] S See International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 292, AFL-CIO ( Franklin Broadcasting Company (Radio Station WMIN) ), 126 NLRB 1212 ; National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians, AFL-CIO, et at. (Gordon Broadcasting of San Diego, Inc., d/b/a Radio Station KSDO), 127 NLRB 1070; Chauffeurs, Teamsters and Flelpers, Local 331, International Brotherhood of Teamsters , etc. (Bulletin Company), 139 NLRB 1391. ^ N ember Fanning concurs in this conclusion on the basis of his dissenting opinion in Local 5, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe- fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO (Arthur Venneri Company), 145 NLRB 1580, 1601. Marine Cooks and Stewards Union , Member of Pacific District, Seafarers International Union of North America, AFL-CIO and Pacific Maritime Association and Matson Terminals, Inc. and International Longshoremen 's and Warehousemen's Union, Local 13, and International Longshoremen 's' and Warehouse- men's Union . Case No. 21 -CD-194. January 11, 1966 DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, following a charge by Pacific Maritime Association and Matson Terminals, Inc., herein called PMS and Terminals, respectively, alleging that the Marine Cooks and Stewards Union, member. of Pacific District, Seafarers International Union of 156 NLRB No. 81.