Carpenters Local 1529

876 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Carpenters District Council of Kansas City and Vicinity and Millwrights Local 1529 and The Sardee Corporation and International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers. Case 17-CD-116 II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The parties stipulated, and we find, that the IAM and the Carpenters, are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. June 30, 1969 DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE BY MEMBERS FANNING, BROWN, AND ZAGORIA This is a proceeding under 10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, following a charge filed by The Sardee Corporation, herein called Sardee, alleging that Carpenters District Council of Kansas City and Vicinity and Millwrights Local 1529, herein called Respondent or Carpenters, violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act. A duly scheduled hearing was held before Hearing Officer, Michael D. Gordon, on March 17 and 18, 1969. All parties appearing were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to adduce evidence bearing upon the issues. Thereafter, the Carpenters and the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, herein called the IAM, filed briefs before the Board. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel. The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error. They are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board makes the following findings: 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY The parties stipulated to the following facts: The Sardee Corporation is an Illinois corporation with its principal office and place of business at Chicago, Illinois, where it is engaged in the manufacture of can conveying equipment. During the course and conduct of its business operations, The Sardee Corporation annually purchases goods and services valued in excess of $50,000 directly from suppliers outside the State of Illinois; and in addition, annually sells goods and services valued in excess of $50,000 directly to customers outside of the State of Illinois. We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 111. THE DISPUTE A. Background and Facts of the Dispute Since 1962 Sardee has built both standard and special order can conveyor systems and has installed such systems. In some instances Sardee sells only the machinery and checks the system after the purchaser has installed it. On February 3, 1969, Sardee began installation of can conveying equipment at the Perk Food Company , herein called Perk, in Kansas City, Kansas . Perk is engaged in the manufacture of pet foods . Sardee had also installed some can manufacturing and conveying equipment at Strongheart Products Company, herein called Strongheart, in Kansas City, Kansas, in late November 1968. Strongheart is similarly engaged in the manufacture of pet food. Kenneth E. Atkison , a supervisor for Sardee and three other employees were sent to Perk to install special can conveying equipment leading to and from the hydrostatic cooker. Sardee's employees are currently represented by the IAM. On the morning of February 3, 1969 , Richard Cox , business agent for the Carpenters, approached Atkison and asked him not to have his men start work because the work belonged to the millwrights. Atkison spoke to the assistant plant manager, Phil Kassens , and also contacted his local IAM representative , Marvin Tillman, who told him to continue working. Cox also talked to Tillman and informed him that if Atkison continued to do the work he would set up a picket. Atkison's men stopped working on February 3, and did not resume work until February 5. On February 7, at approximately 10 o'clock, the Carpenters put up a picket sign in front of Perk's facility containing the following language: NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC This notice is addressed only to the General Public and not to any employer or employee. Millwright work , Carpenter work being performed on this job by SARDEE is not being done by Bldg. Trades , Millwrights or Carpenters. The employer does not have a bargaining contract with the below named labor organization and as a result thereof, the prevailing rates of pay and conditions for Millwrights or Carpenters are not being met by said employer . CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL OF KANSAS CITY AND VICINITY. Atkison stopped working after the picket sign appeared, and Kassens requested that he not start again until the problem was resolved . Sardee's 177 NLRB No. 96 CARPENTERS LOCAL 1529 877 employees left the plant about noon. The picketing was not resumed after February 7, and Sardee's employees resumed the installation work after the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas granted a Temporary Injunction on February 28, •1969. B. The Work in Dispute The dispute concerns the installation of certain can manufacturing and conveying equipment at the Kansas City, Kansas, pet food manufacturing plant, of Perk Food Company. Specifically, the installation at Perk consists of four special magnetic elevators and two cable systems for can-conveying to the hydrostatic cooker, a cross conveyor, and two cable systems coming from the cooker. The conveyors in dispute carry only filled cans. The magnetic elevators pick up the cans after they are sealed and washed and place them on the conveyor to the hydrostatic cooker. There are two magnetic elevators that take the cans from the hydrostatic cooker to the conveyor. The hydrostatic cooker at Perk was being installed by the millwrights. The cans slide onto the nylon-covered cable conveyor and the cable conveys the can along four side rails. In order to prevent the cans from falling off, the cable must be set at the proper incline or decline. From the magnetic elevator to the hydrostatic cooker the conveyor extends approximately 220 to 230 feet. The end feed cable is approximately l 1 feet above the floor. C. The Contentions of the Parties Sardee contends that it makes mostly firm bids to its customers, a price that includes the cost of the equipment and the installation price, and that since its own employees fabricate the equipment, they are more efficient in its installation . If the installation is faulty, Sardee contends that it must remedy the problem, as it is required to guarantee the job. Sardee's firm bids are based on its anticipation that its own employees will perform the job. The Carpenters contends that, although a jurisdictional agreement between the IAM and the Carpenters covering the work in dispute is no longer in effect, this agreement coupled with the IAM's relinquishment of the work over the 12-year span of the agreement supports its claim. Carpenters contends further, that the work in dispute is performed exclusively by millwrights, in the local area, and throughout the nation, and that the Board' s assignment of the disputed work to the IAM will cause loss of work to the millwrights. The IAM contends that Sardee, like other employers in the industry who manufacture can conveying machinery, desires to utilize factory trained erectors in lieu of millwrights to install their equipment. Further, the IAM contends that its agreement with Sardee, in effect from March 1, 1966, until February 28, 1969, was in effect at all times material, and employees performing the disputed work are clearly within the unit or job classifications covered by the agreement. D. Applicability of the Statute Before the Board may proceed with a determination of dispute pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act, it must be satisfied that there is a reasonable cause to believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) has been violated. The amended charge herein alleges a violation of Section 8(b)(4)(i),(ii), and (D) of the Act. The record shows that on or about February 3, 1969, the Carpenters, through its agent, Cox, induced and encouraged individuals employed by Perk, to strike or refuse to perform work, and threatened persons engaged in commerce with an object of forcing or requiring Perk to reassign work presently being performed by members of IAM to members of Carpenters in violation of Section 8(b)(4)(i)(ii)(D). We conclude that there is reasonable cause to believe that a violation of Section 8(b)(4)(D) has occurred, and that the dispute is properly before the Board for determination. E. Merits of the Dispute 1. Collective-bargaining agreement On March 1, 1966, Sardee became a party to an agreement with the IAM effective until February 28, 1969. While the agreement makes reference to the premium pay for journeymen who have to remain overnight outside of Chicago, it does not define the unit or the work in dispute. Sardee does not have an agreement with the Carpenters. 2. Company and industry practices The record contains evidence that the usual practice is for Sardee both to manufacture and to install its machinery, and that it makes its bids based on the use of its own employees. In those instances where the customer contracts out the installation or performs it with his own employees, Sardee usually sends an employee down to check out the installation before it can guarantee the system. Sardee has used millwrights from a local hiring hall on jobs where the labor situation forced it to do so. There is also evidence in the record that millwrights have performed work involving conveyor systems within the Carpenters' geographical area. Although the IAM and the Carpenters entered into a jurisdictional agreement in 1954 in which the IAM conceded jurisdiction over the installation of conveyors to the Carpenters, that agreement was cancelled by the Carpenters in 1966. We conclude that while the millwrights have performed installation work on conveyors, the dispute herein is 878 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD limited to the installation of special can conveying equipment, and Sardee' s practice is to assign the work to its employees. evidence that on at least one particular job where Sardee used millwrights , the job took longer and Sardee lost money. 3. Related skills There appears to be no issue herein with respect to the necessary skills and tools available to both parties, since both the IAM and the Carpenters possess the necessary skills and tools to perform the disputed work . Sardee' s employees undergo on-the-job training for up to 4 years, including training in installation by assisting erectors on the road . The Carpenters provides a formal 4 year apprenticeship program , which combines classroom study in addition to on-the-job training . Sardee concedes that millwrights with prior experience could install the can-conveying equipment . Some of the tools required for the performance of the disputed work include ladders, stud gun, cut-off-wheel, grinding wheels and special bending irons. All of these tools, with the exception of the bending irons, are used by Sardee' s employees and the millwrights. The bending irons are used by Sardee' s employees to shape twist fittings that change the direction of the can on the conveyor from an upright to a rolling position . While both parties possess the necessary skills, we conclude that assignment of the disputed work to Sardee's employees would provide greater assurance that properly qualified persons were assigned to do the work. 4. Efficiency and economy Sardee prefers to have its own employees, represented by the IAM, install the can conveyors on the ground that since they have fabricated the system they have more knowledge of its operation and therefore are better equipped to perform the installation work . There is evidence that Sardee's employees would require less supervision , since they can start to install all four areas of the conveyor at one time. In addition , Sardee' s supervisors work along with the journeymen , while the millwrights require a nonworking supervisor for every 3 millwrights on the job. There is evidence in the record that, although the journeymen rate per hour of the millwrights is higher than that of Sardee' s journeymen , the overall cost including travel expenses and bonuses to Sardee's employees performing out-of-town jobs is higher . However, Sardee counters this fact with evidence that it can perform a given job more quickly with its own employees thereby keeping the overall cost of a job down . Moreover , there is 5. Gain or loss of jobs The Carpenters contend that assignment of the disputed work to Sardee' s employees represented by the IAM will deprive local millwrights of work which they have done for years . However, as it has been the prevailing practice of Sardee to assign the work to its employees, assignment of the disputed work to the millwrights would result in a loss of job opportunities for Sardee's employees. Conclusions Based upon the entire record and after full consideration of all relevant factors involved, we find that the work assignment to Sardee' s employees represented by the IAM is proper. This determination is limited to the particular controversy giving rise to the dispute. DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE Pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and upon the basis of the foregoing findings , the National Labor Relations Board hereby makes the following Determination of Dispute: 1. Employees employed by The Sardee Corporation, as production and maintenance employees and currently represented by the International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, are entitled to install the special magnetic elevators and the cable systems for can conveying to the hydrostatic cooker, a cross conveyor, and the cable systems coming from the cooker, at the Perk Food Co., Inc., plant at Kansas City, Kansas. 2. The Carpenters District Council of Kansas City and Vicinity and Millwright Local 1529 are not and have not been entitled, by means proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act, to force or require the Sardee Corporation to assign the above work to its members. 3. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision and Determination of Dispute, the Carpenters District Council of Kansas City and Vicinity and Millwrights Local 1529, shall notify the Regional Director for Region 17, in writing , whether they will or will not refrain from forcing or requiring Sardee, by means proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D) to assign the work in dispute to employees represented by the Carpenters rather than Sardee's employees represented by the IAM.