Intl. Assn. Of Heat & Frost Insulators, Local 12

40 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers, Local No. 12, AFL-CIO I and Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Power Generation Service Department)? Case 29-CC-244 September 3, 1971 DECISION AND ORDER BY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND KENNEDY On April 12, 1971, Trial Examiner Bernard J. Seff issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that Respondent had engaged in certain unfair labor practices as alleged in the complaint, and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Decision. Thereafter, Respondent and the General Counsel filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's Decision and supporting briefs, and Westinghouse filed an "adoption" of the General Counsel's exceptions. 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 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 Examiner's Decision, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner, as modified herein. The Trial Examiner held, and we agree, that Local 12 violated Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B) of the Act by inducing and causing a work stoppage at Consolidat- ed Edison's3 Astoria, New York, powerhouse jobsite, with an object of forcing Johns-Manville Sales Corporation 4 and Con Ed to cease using in the New York area preinsulated gas turbines which were manufactured by Westinghouse at its Lester, Pennsyl- vania, plant.5 In reaching this conclusion, the Trial Examiner relied on (1) the "right to control" test and (2) the absence of a work preservation objective on the part of Local 12. As to (1), the Trial Examiner correctly found that Local 12's stoppage was an unlawful secondary boycott because it was directed against J-M 6 and Con Ed, two neutral employers who were incapable of meeting Local 12's demands which arose out of its primary dispute with Westinghouse.7 As to (2), the Trial Examiner correctly found that Local 12 could not properly claim the preinsulated work on the gas turbines as it has traditionally tind historically been performed by the employees at*the Westinghouse plant. Local 12 contends, however, that its members had for more than 80 years done• all insulation work on steam turbines in the New York area and that they were seeking to preserve their traditional 'insulation work when the gas turbines were introduced into the area. Even assuming that Local 12 was seeking to continue performing its historic insulation work at the Con Ed jobsite, the record shows that Local 12 went far beyond the legitimate objective of regaining traditional unit work at the said jobsite.8 Thus, Jacob Novak, Local 12's business manager, testified that he expressed to Irvine Retterer, a Westinghouse official, his concern that Local 12 was losing much of its "traditional work" in the New York area, and therefore insisted on a commitment that Westinghouse would not bring-any preinsulated gas turbines into that area in the future. Accordingly, we conclude that Local 12's work preservation defense fails because its conduct demon- strates that an unlawful objective of the stoppage was to boycott, in the New York area gas turbines: not preinsulated by its members, rather than solely to protect the,work at the jobsite 9 ORDER Pursuant ' to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board adopts as its Order the recommend- ed Order of the Trial Examiner, and orders that Respondent, International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers , Local No. 12, AFL-CIO, its officers, agents, and representatives, shall take the action set forth in the Trial Examiner's recommended Order. i Herein called Local 12. 2 Herein called Westinghouse. 3 Herein called Con Ed. 4 Herein called J-M 5 The record shows that the gas turbines shipped to Con Ed from December 1969 to February 1970 were the first of this type to be introduced into the New York area. Prior thereto, Con Ed used steam turbines. 6 Local 12 members were employed by J-M which was under a service subcontract with Westinghouse to perform at the Con Ed jobsite insulation and other tasks not completed at the Westinghouse plant. 7 See Mechanical Contractors Association of Detroit, Inc., 177 NLRB No. 14. R See National Woodwork Manufacturers Association v, N.L R.B., 386 U.S 612, wherein the Supreme Court found that the work preservation defense is valid only if the union's secondary boycott is "related solely to the job-site" employees. 9 In view of the foregoing, we do not deem it necessary to consider the General Counsel's contention as to an additional basis for finding the violation, namely, Local 12's purported offer to permit premsulated gas turbines in the New York area on the condition that they bear the Local 12 decal. 193 NLRB No. 4 INTL. ASSN. OF HEAT & FROST INSULATORS, LOCAL 12 41 TRIAL EXAMINER'S DECISION STATEMENT OF THE CASE BERNARD J. SEFF , Trial Examiner: Upon a charge of unfair labor practices filed on June 3, 1970,1 by Westing- house Electric Corporation (Power Generation Service Department), hereinafter referred to as Westinghouse, against International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers, Local No. 12, AFL-CIO, herein called Local 12 or Respondent, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board issued a complaint and notice of hearing on June 29, alleging that Respondent violated Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, herein called the Act. By its answer the Respondent denies the commission of any unfair labor practices. This matter was heard by Bernard J. Seff in Brooklyn, New York, on November 30, December 1, and 2, 1970.2 All parties appeared at the hearing, were represented by counsel, and afforded full opportunity to be heard, to produce, examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence material to the issues. Oral argument at the close of the hearing was waived. Briefs were received from the General Counsel and Respondent which have been duly considered. Upon the entire record in the case and from my observation of the witnesses, I make the following: Ed purchased and caused to be delivered to its Astoria powerhouse electrical power generating equipment and other goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000, of which goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 were transported and delivered to the Astoria plant in interstate commerce directly from States of the United States other than New York. Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, hereinafter called J- M, is a New York corporation which maintains its principal office and place of business at 560 South 3rd Avenue, in the city of Mount Vernon, New York, where it is engaged in the sale and distribution of asbestos insulation, building, and construction materials and related products. During the past year J-M purchased and caused to be transported and delivered to its customers located in the State of New York, the above-described materials and other goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 of which goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 were transported and delivered to places of business of its customers in interstate commerce directly from States of the United States other than the State of New York. Con Ed, Westinghouse, and J-M are employers and persons engaged in commerce and in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) and 8(b)(4) of the Act. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE EMPLOYERS Westinghouse, a Pennsylvania corporation, maintains its principal office and place of business at 3 Gateway Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Westinghouse also maintains and operates other offices, plants, and places of business throughout the United States, including a plant at Lester, Pennsylvania, herein called the Lester plant, where it is engaged in the manufacture, maintenance, servicing, sale, and distribution of gas turbine generators and related products. During the past year, which is a representative period, Westinghouse manufactured, sold, and, distributed from its Lester plant products valued in excess of $50,000 of which products valued in excess of $50,000 were shipped from said plant in interstate commerce directly to States other than Pennsylvania. Consolidated Edison, hereinafter called Con Ed, a New York corporation, maintains an office and place of business at 4 Irving Place in the city and State of New York, and various other places of business in the State of New York, including its Astoria, New York, plant, where it is engaged in the production, sale, and distribution of electricity. During the past year, Con Ed derived gross revenues in excess of $1 million. During the same period of time Con I All dates refer to 1970 unless otherwise indicated 2 The transcript is hereby corrected in accordance with the unopposed motion of the General Counsel dated January 20, 1971. 3 The pertinent part of this Section is as follows- 8(b) It shall be an unfair labor practice for a labor organization or its agents- (ft) to engage in, or to induce or encourage any individual employed by any person engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce to engage in, a strike or a refusal in the course of his Respondent Local 12 is, and has been at all times material herein, a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. The Issues The complaint alleges in substance that the Union induced or encouraged employees of J-M to refuse to complete the insulation of five gas turbine generators at the Astoria, New York, powerhouse jobsite of Con Ed, of which four had their exhaust manifolds preinsulated with block insulation by Westinghouse at its Lester plant, and the fifth was delivered without its exhaust manifold preinsulated because of scheduling difficulties experienced by Westinghouse. The object of Respondent in instructing its employees to go out on strike from May 13 to about June 17 was (a) to force or require J-M and Con Ed to cease (1) using or otherwise dealing in the gas turbines (products) of Westinghouse and (2) doing business with Westinghouse and (b) to force or require Con Ed and J-M to cease doing business with each other, all in violation of Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B) of the Act .3 employment, to use, manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities or to perform any services; or (u) to threaten, coerce, or restrain any person engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce, where ... an object thereof is: s (B) forcing or requiring any person to cease using, selling, handling, transpoShng, or otherwise dealing in the products of any other producer, processor, or manufacturer, or to cease doing business with any other person. . 42 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD B. The Facts In or about August 1969, Con Ed awarded a contract valued in excess of '$ 1 million to Westinghouse for the installation of five as turbine generators at Con Ed's Astoria, New York, plant. The gas turbine generators were manufactured and assembled by Westinghouse employees at its Lester plant. T1>ie Westinghouse employees who have been represented for many years by Local 107, United Electrical Radio anal Machine Workers of America, hereinafter referred tti as UE, performed asbestos insula- tion work on each of the five gas turbine generators. The generators were designated 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9. The exhaust manifolds of units 5, 6, 7, and 8 were preinsulated with block insulation by the UE members of Westinghouse's Lester plant. Unit ts turbine or combustor was also preinsulated with bltk insulation but due to scheduling delays and the urgency of prompt delivery it was shipped to New York with its exhaust manifold uninsulated. All five units were shipped to the Astoria plant over a period of time from December 1969 through February 1970. When the gas turbines arrived at the Astoria jobsite, it was necessary for Westinghouse to tighten certain bolts, install pipefittings and thermal couples and gauges in the areas of the combustor and exhaust manifolds sections and to insulate the combustor and exhaust manifold sections' horizontal joints or seams with blanket insulation material and further insulate the expansion joints between the component parts. Irll addition to the work which was performed on units S, 6, 7, and 8, it was necessary to perform the same insulation work upon unit 9, but note with respect to unit 9 it was also necessary to install block insulation upon the exhaust manifold of this unit. On March 17 Westinghouse entered into a service subcontract with J-M to complete the remaining incidental asbestos insulation work on the gas turbines. Later, on April 14, Westinghouse further contracted with J-M to furnish and install 4-inch thick thermobestors lagging upon turbine 9's exhaust manifold which, as explained, supra, had been shipped to on Ed uninsulated. During late March: or early April, J-M, in accordance with its contract with Westinghouse, assigned Robert Barrett, a mechanic working foreman and Raymond Stiles, an apprentice mechanic, both of whom are members of Respondent Union, to perform and complete the asbestos insulation work required on the,gas turbines at Con Ed's Astoria plant. On May 12 Jacob Novak, business manager and also the International Union's vice president, called at the Astoria jobsite and spoke to J-M's employees Barrett and Stiles. Novak instructed them to leave the jobsite until the entire Westinghouse insulation job was assigned to members of the Respondent Union. They finished out their day but went out on strike and remained off the job from May 13 to June 17. Later, on May 12, Novak informed Hartley Grim, Con Ed's Astoria plant resident construction manager for gas turbines, that he was pulling his men off the Westinghouse gas turbine job. Grim said it was important that the installation job be completed in order for Con Ed to meet its electric power requirements for the summer of 1970. Novak, in a later conversation on the same day with Martin Huvane, Westinghouse supervising and erection supervisor in Con Ed's Astoria plant, stated: He (Novak) was upset by the fact that Westinghouse was sending gas turbines to this area pre-insulated without the Asbestos Workers stamp or label on them. Huvane explained that as of May 13 the following work bad not yet been completed on the five turbines: We only completed one unit, number 5, and we had started work on numbers 6, 7, and 8. We had maybe half of number 9 unit completed.... With respect to number 9 we had completed the exhaust manifold. Huvane said that when the turbine gets into the field Westinghouse checks the horizontal joint bolting to make sure it is not loose. The pipefittings, thermal couples, and gauges are also checked. These last items are not insulation but are part of the piping system. Aloysius Kenny, J-M's construction superintendent, had two conversations with Novak after Barrett and Stiles Walked off the job. Novak said: He would put the men back to work if Westinghouse would not bring any pre-insulated material into the New York area. He offered to go to Philadelphia or anyplace in Pennsylvania to meet with Westinghouse people to try to settle the strike. The record shows that Westinghouse shipped 355 turbines throughout the country. The turbines, almost tithout exception, had exhaust manifolds preinsulated in its Lester factory. It is clear that the five turbines involved in this matter were the first shipped by Westinghouse into the New York area. J-M has a collective-bargaining contract with Respondent4 It is not disputed that because of the 4 It provides in pertinent=part as follows: ARTICLE VI Each employer recognizes the Union's desire to retain all work regularly performed for the employer and the Union recognizes the employer's needs to maintain an efficient operation ; therefore, each employer will continue to use bargaining unit employees and not subcontract that work described in Article XI that was been traditionally and regularly performed by its employees, and we further agree that application of all new thermal insulation which may be a replacement for/or in addition to materials now being used as legitimate claims of the trade of Local No. 12. The Union agrees not to contract, subcontract or estimate on work, nor allow its membership to do so 'nor to act in any trade capacity other than that of workman . It is alsdl agreed that no member of a firm or office of a corporation, or their representative or agent , shall execute any part of the work of application of materials. ARTICLE XI This agreement covers the rates of pay, rules and working conditions of all Mechanics and Improvers covered by this agreement and abide by this agreement, regardless of the location of their employment within the jurisdiction of Local No. 12, when they are engaged in the preparation, fabrication, alteration, application, erection, assembling, molding, spraying, pouring, mixing, hanging, adjusting, repairing, dismantling, reconditioning, maintenance, finishing and/or weather-proofing of cold or hot thermal insulation with such materials as may be specified when these materials are to be installed for thermal purposes in voids, or to create voids, or on either piping, fittings, valves, boilers, ducts, flues, tanks, vats, equipment, or on any hot or cold surfaces for the purpose of thermal control . This is also to include all labor connected with the handling and distribution of thermal insulating materials on job premises and all other such work that is within the jurisdiction of Local No. 12. INTL. ASSN. OF HEAT & FROST INSULATORS, LOCAL 12 43 preinsulation of the -exhaust manifolds the amount of incidental additional ' insulation which remained to be installed at the jobsite left about 30 percent of the insulation work to be performed by Respondent's mem- bers. The balance of this work was performed by Westinghouse employees (members of the UE) at Westing- house's Lester plant. Westinghouse employees have traditionally and historically applied block insulation on the gas turbine exhaust manifolds manufactured by Westinghouse. On May 14 Irvine 'etterer, Westinghouse's manager of industrial relations, called Novak to explain his Company's practice of preinsulatiog combustors and exhaust manifolds of its gas turbines at its Lester plant prior to shipment to a given jobsite. Due to shipping schedules the exhaust manifold of, turbine number 9 had been delivered to the Astoria jobsite uninsulated. Novak replied that over the years he had seen a progressive decline of asbestos work in the New York area; - Respondent had 200 unemployed members; that he would fight any company, including Westinghouse, which ;tried to bring preinsulated turbines into the New York area; that the only way the instant dispute could be resolved was if Westinghouse would give him some consideration for the four preinsulated turbines which had been shipped into the New York area; that Novak wanted a commitment that Westinghouse would no longer ship preinsulated turbines into this area in the future. Retterer told Novak that Westinghouse would not negotiate with him; that it had no contractual relationship with Local 12; that Novak had his contract with J-M. Novak answered that he had a valid jurisdictional dispute with Westinghouse to install all the insulation on each of the five gas turbines;, that he had been instructed by the union membership to, protect their rights so far as work preservation was concerned. Novak reiterated that he was willing to waive the Union's rights to work already performed upon the four turbines in exchange for assurances that Westinghouse would not ship any other preinsulated turbines into Local 12's area in the future. Novak suggested that Retterer take the problem up with International Union President Hutchinson. Retterer called Hutchinson a number of times and was finally informed by Hutchinson that he, had spoken to Novak who was adamant in refusing to put his men back to work without receiving assurances fXom Westinghouse as explained supra. Hutchinson said Local 12 was autonomous and he could do nothing to change Novak's decision. In the course of Retterer's conversations with Hutchinson he said Novak was making a work preservation claim but that he, Retterer, could not understand how Local 12 could claim they lost insulation work they I*d never had in the first place. On June 1 Retterericalled Novak to report an oil leak in one of the preinsul4ted gas turbines which had been installed. In order to: repair this leak it was necessary to remove the insulation. The strike and the oil leak were causing Westinghouse to fall further behind in its insulation at Astoria and exposed it to a $1,000-a-day penalty in its contract with Con Ed, Novak remained unyielding. He did express a willingness to discuss the entire problem. Such a discussion took place at a restaurant among Novak, Grim, and Daniels, the Con Ed administrator of labor relations, but no progress was reached in settlement of the dispute. Thereafter, on June 16, a further meeting was held at J- M's New York City office at which Westinghouse representatives Retterer and Arthur Gladfelter, craft labor relations supervisor ; J-M officials Richard Stapleton, Tom Williams, District Manager Paul Mattern and Branch Manager Herbert Pattan were all present together with Novak and Union Secretary-Treasurer Kellner. At this meeting Novak said the asbestos workers had historically performed insulation work for over 62 years and the work has progressively decreased; significantly, Novak stated the dispute did not involve the International Union but was a dispute between Local 12 and Westinghouse. Once again Novak offered to forget the first four preinsulated gas turbines if Westinghouse agreed not to slip any more preinsulated gas turbine units into the New York area. For his part, Retterer explained that almost without exception gas turbines were manufactured and preinsulated lfy Westinghouse's Lester plant employees who were represented by the UE. The General Counsel in his brief recapitulates the facts to show that Local 12 directed all its efforts to settle the problem with Westinghouse officials and not with J-M's representatives: 1) on May 12, Novak told Huvane, he, Novak, "was upset by the fact that Westinghouse was sending gas turbines to the New York area without Asbestos Worker's stamps or labels on them; 2) on May 12 or 13, Novak told Kenny of J-M, that he, Novak, would put J-M's men back to work provided Westinghouse would agree not to bring any more pre- insulated gas turbines into the New York area; 3) on May 14, Novak told Retterer that he would fight any company, including Westinghouse, which tried to bring pre-insulated turbines into the New York area; 4) Novak wanted a commitment from Westinghouse ... that in future it would no longer ship pre-insulated gas turbines into the New York area; 5) Novak had a valid jurisdictional dispute with Westinghouse to do the insulation work; 6) Novak would accept insulated equipment anywhere in his jurisdiction provided it had the union decal on it; 7) Novak was willing to waive the union's rights to the work already performed upon the 4 turbines in consideration of Westinghouse assurances that it would not bring any additional pre-insulated turbines in Respondent's area in the future; 8) On June 1 Novak told Retterer that he would fight Westinghouse to the end; that he would do anything possible including "going to jail" to prevent Westing- house from shipping pre-insulated turbines. - The General Counsel argues that Local 12's objectives were not directed to the labor relations of J-M's employees but were designed to satisfy the Union's objectives elsewhere. It is further pointed out that the record is barren of evidence that Local 12's members traditionally per- formed such insulation work for Westinghouse. ' Respondent's brief advances the contention that "there is no evidence that Local 12 had any interest in Westing- 44 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD house's labor relations with its employees at the Lester plant. On the contrary the record is replete with testimony that the object of Local 12's activities was to preserve the work of insulating generators by their members at the jobsite. The provisions of the collective-bargaining agree- ment between Local 12 and J-M clearly indicate the intent of the Union to retain all work `traditionally and regularly performed' by its members. It is further argued that Local 12 was not interested in having Westinghouse cease doing business with J-M. All of Novak's conversations with Con Ed and Westinghouse were aimed at having Westinghouse change its method of shipping gas turbines into the New York area in preinsulated form." From this reasoning Respondent contends its object would not have been furthered by "a general cessation of business among the parties." In support of this contention it is pointed out that Novak repeatedly stated the Union would waive any claim it had to work on these generators if Westinghouse would agree to cease shipping preinsulated generators into the New York area in the future. Respondent contends that while Respondent's activities were directed against West- inghouse the objectives of Respondent were not designed for the object prohibited under Section 8(b)(4)(i) and/or (ii) because subsection (B) described the forbidden object as "cease doing business." Analysis and Conclusions Respondent argues "that respondent union had but one goal, one objective, and that was to perform the disputed work at the job site." The Supreme Court in National Woodwork Manufacturers Assn v. N. L. R. B., 386 U.S. 612, 644, held: The determination whether the "will not handle" sentence of [the agreement] and its enforcement violated . . . § 8(b)(4)(B) cannot be made without an inquiry into whether, under all the surrounding circumstances, the Union's objective was preservation of work for Frouge's employees, or whether the agreements and boycott were tactically calculated to satisfy union objectives elsewhere. ... [Emphasis supplied.] On the facts of this case it is clear that the Respondent had its primary dispute with Westinghouse. The record is replete with evidence that the significant meetings and phone conversations with Novak were had with representa- tives of Westinghouse. The genesis of the dispute arose from the fact that the generators were partially insulated by Westinghouse with its own employees and not entirely by employees represented by Local 12. It should be noted that Westinghouse produced 355 gas turbines which, almost without exception, had the exhaust manifolds preinsulated at the factory. It was not controverted that the generators delivered to Con Ed were thefirst preinsulated gas turbines delivered in the New York area. Under these circumstances it is difficult to see how the union members could claim they traditionally and historically performed this work. It would seem that since Westinghouse employees preinsulat- ed these turbines from 1949 to date, in fact, the work in question had traditionally and historically been performed by Westinghouse employees. Further it is manifest that Local 12 employees cannot claim they have traditionally performed the insulation work in question because it was not disputed that these generators were brought into the New York area for thefirst time for installation in Con Ed's Astoria plant. It is evident on the record that Local 12 has no present dispute with its Employer, J-M, since the Union, through Novak, in effect admitted it was not raising any present claim to the work involved on the situs of the job. This is borne out by Novak's repeated offers to waive any claim to this work conditioned solely on his receiving assurances from Westinghouse that it would not ship any additional preinsulated gas turbines into the New York area in the future. Contrary to what Respondent argues the Union's strike was, in the language of National Woodwork, calculated to satisfy union objectives directed against Westinghouse and not J-M. The objective in short was to attempt to cause Westinghouse to alter its method of manufacturing gas turbines so that in the future no gas turbines would be delivered in the New York area with preinsulated exhaust manifolds. The Board in Local 636, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of The Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry (Mechanical Contractor's Association of Detroit, Inc.), 177 NLRB No. 14, posed the question to be answered as follows: The issue in this and related cases in determining whether a union by its conduct has violated Section 8(b)(4)(B) of the Act is whether the dispute is between the union and the person against whom the union's action is directed or between the union and another person. This issue can be resolved, as recently stated by the Court of Appeals for the First Circuit [Beacon Castle Square Bldg. Corp. v. N.L.R.B., 406 F.2d 188 (C.A. 1)], by a consideration of two questions: (1) What was the union seeking? (2) Was the person against whom the union directed its action in a position to do anything about it? Respondent's purpose was to have Westinghouse cease shipping preinsulated gas turbines into the New York area in the future. J-M, the person against whom the Union directed its action, was powerless to do anything about it. By the same token J-M and Con Ed were both neutrals in the dispute between Local 12 and Westinghouse. Since both Companies were incapable of complying with Respondent'- s demands an object of Respondent's conduct directed at J- M must inevitably have been to cause both J-M and Con Ed to cease doing business with Westinghouse in the future. The pressure brought to bear on J-M by the Union was not for the purpose of regulating relations between-J-M and its employees, but rather for its ultimate effect elsewhere and this is an unlawful secondary objective. Accordingly, by inducing and causing a work stoppage with an object of forcing J-M and Con Ed to cease using preinsulated gas turbines in the New York area manufactured by Westing- house, Respondent violated Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B) of the Act and I so find. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. International Association of Heat and Frost Insula- tors and Asbestos Workers, Local No. 12, AFL-CIO, is a INTL. ASSN. OF HEAT & FROST INSULATORS, LOCAL 12 45 labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 2. Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Power Genera- tion Service Department), Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., and Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, are employers engaged in commerce or industries affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) and 8(b)(4) of the Act. 3. From May 13 to June 17, 1970, Respondent violated Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B) of the Act by engaging in certain conduct found in section III. 4. The said unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of the Act. THE REMEDY Having found that the Union has engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (u)(B) of the Act, the customary cease-and-desist order and the usual affirmative relief ordered in cases of this nature, including posting of notices, is recommended. Upon the foregoing findings of fact, conclusions of law, and the entire record, and pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Act, I hereby issue the following recommended: 5 ORDER International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers, Local 12, AFL-CIO, its officers, agents, and representatives, shall: 1. Cease and desist from inducing or encouraging the employees of Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, or any other employer or person , to engage in a strike or refusal in the course of their employment to use , manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities or to perform any services for their employer; or coercing and restraining Johns-Manville Sales Corporation or any other employer or person where an object thereof is ( 1) to force or require Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, or any other employer or person, to cease purchasing, using, handling, transport- ing, or otherwise working on gas turbines fabricated by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Power Generation Service Department), or any other employer or person, on behalf of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., or any other employer or person, (2) to force or require Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., and Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, to cease doing business with each other or with Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Power Generation Service Department). 2. Take the following affirmative action which it is found will effectuate the policies of the Act: (a) Notify the members of International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers, Local No. 12, AFL-CIO, that Respondent has no objection to the installation or otherwise handling of gas turbines at any project of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., that has been preinsulated by any employer for and on behalf of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc. (b) Notify the members of International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers, Local No. 12, AFL-CIO, that any previous instructions, requests, or appeals which Respondent has made against installing or otherwise handling gas turbines at projects of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., insulated for or on behalf of Consolidated Edison as set forth in (a) above have been withdrawn. (c) Post at the offices of International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers, Local No. 12, AFL-CIO, copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." 6 Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 29, after being duly signed by the Union's official representative, shall be posted by it immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to members are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respondent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (d) Deliver to the Regional Director for Region 29 signed copies of said notice in sufficient number for posting by Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, Consolidated Edison Corporation, and by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Power Generation Service Department) and, they being willing, at all locations where notices to their respective employees are customarily posted. (e) Notify the Regional Director for Region 29, in writing, within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this Decision, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith.? 5 In the event no exceptions are filed as provided by Section 102.46 of the Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, the findings, conclusions, and recommended Order herein shall, as provided in Section 102 48 of the Rules and Regulations , be adopted by the Board and become its findings, conclusions, and order , and all objections thereto shall be deemed waived for all purposes. 6 In the event that the Board's Order is enforced by a Judgment of a United States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD" shall be changed to read "POSTED PURSUANT TO A JUDGMENT OF THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS ENFORCING AN ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD" 7 In the event that this recommended Order is adopted by the Board after exceptions have been filed, this provision shall be modified to read. "Notify the Regional Director for Region 29, in writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith." APPENDIX NOTICE To MEMBERS POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government After a trial in which all sides had the opportunity to present their evidence it has been found that we violated the law by committing unfair labor practices. Accordingly we post this notice and we will keep the promises that we make in this notice. WE WILL NOT (a) induce or encourage the employees of Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, or of any other employer or person, to engage in a strike or concerted refusal in the course of their employment, to use, manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities, 46 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD or to perform any services for their employers or (b) coerce and restrain Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, or any other employer or person, where an object thereof in either instance is (1) to force or require Johns- Manville Sales Corporation, or any other employer or person, to cease purchasing, using, handling, transport- ing, or otherwise working on gas turbines insulated by Westinghouse Electric Corporation, or any other employer or person, on behalf of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., or any other employer, or (2) to force or require Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., and Johns-Manville Sales Corporation to cease doing business with each other or with Westinghouse Electric Corporation. WE WILL and do hereby cancel and withdraw any orders and instructions given to our members and any other individuals not to install work upon or otherwise handle gas turbines at projects of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., which gas turbines were insulated for or on behalf of Consolidated Edison as set forth in the preceding paragraph. WE WILL and do hereby, notify our members, and other individuals employed by Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, that we have no objection to their installii4g, working upon, or otherwise handling gas turbines at projects of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., which gas turbines were insulated for or on behalf of Consolidated Edison as set forth in the second preceding paragraph. Dated By INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HEAT AND FROST INSULATORS AND ASBESTOS WORKERS, LOCAL No. 12, AFL-CIO (Labor Organization) (Representative) (Title) This is an official notice and must not be defaced by anyone. 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. Any questions concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions may be directed to the Board's Office, Fourth Floor, 16 Court Street, Brooklyn, New York 11201, Telephone 212-596-3535.