Local 445, Teamsters

46 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Local 445, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of Ameri- ca and Blount Brothers Corporation and Local 38, Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, AFL-CIO and Road Local 669, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO Local 445, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of Ameri- ca and Blount Brothers Corporation and Local 38, Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, AFL-CIO and Local 201 , United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry , of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO and Local 1000, Laborers 1 International Union of North America, AFL-CIO Local 445, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of Ameri- ca and Blount Brothers Corporation and Interna- tional Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local Union No. 203, AFL-CIO and Local 38, Sheet Metal Workers' International Association, AFL-CIO and Local 201 , United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO. Cases 3-CD-301-1, -2, -3, -4, 3-CD-303, and 3-CD-343-1, -2 May 24, 1972 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND KENNEDY Upon charges and amended charges filed on April 15 and 30, 1970,2 respectively, in Cases 3-CD-301-1, -2, -3, and -4; a charge and amended charge filed on April 21 and 30, respectively, in Case 3-CD-303; and charges filed on December 10 in Cases 3-CD-343-1 and -2 by Blount Brothers Corpora- tion, herein called Blount, and duly served on Local 445, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauf- feurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, herein called Respondent, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, by the Regional Director for Region 3, issued a complaint on October 22, 1971, alleging that Respondent had engaged in I During the hearing in the underlying 10(k) proceedings mentioned below, Laborers and Teamsters (Respondent) agreed to a method of resolving their differences regarding the disputed work Blount agreed to be bound by this arrangement, consequently we made no assignment in the 10(k) proceeding relating to Laborers, and Laborers is not a party in the instant matter and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(D) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. Copies of the charges, complaint, and notice of hearing before a Trial Examiner were duly served on the parties to this proceeding. The complaint alleges and Respondent's answer admits that Respondent has failed and refused to comply with the terms of the Board's Decision and Determination of Disputes in the underlying 10(k) proceeding.3 The complaint further, alleges that Respondent violated the Act by inducing individuals employed by Blount and a number of its subcontrac- tors to engage in strikes or refusals in the course of their employment to use, manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or work on goods, articles, materials, or commodities or to perform services and by threatening, coercing, and restraining Blount and a number of its subcontractors. The complaint also alleges that an object of the above- described acts and conduct engaged in by Respon- dent was to force and require Blount and its subcontractors to assign to employees who are members of or represented by Respondent, rather than to employees who are members of or represent- ed by various other labor organizations described infra, the work of (1) unloading from the truck to the ground or the dock all materials and equipment delivered to International Business Machines Corpo- ration, herein called IBM, Buildings 707 and 330-C (located in Poughkeepsie and East Fishkill, New York, respectively)4 by trucks owned by common carriers or by individual subcontractors and (2) handling and distributing to the point of installation inside the unaccepted portions of Building 330-C all nondelicate equipment which ultimately requires installation by employees represented by labor organizations other than Respondent. In its answer, Respondent admits in part, and denies in part, the allegations in the complaint. On December 2, 1971, the parties to the instant proceeding executed a Motion To Transfer Proceed- ing to the Board and Stipulation in which they agreed that the charges, order consolidating cases, complaint and notice of hearing, answer, and order postponing the hearing indefinitely , as well as the Board's Decision and Determination of Disputes and the record and exhibits in the 10(k) proceeding, constitute the entire record in these cases and that no oral testimony was necessary or desired by any of the 2 All dates are 1970 unless indicated otherwise 3 Local 445, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Ware- housemen and Helpers of America (Blount Brothers Corporation), 193 NLRB No 25 4 Both jobsites are located in Dutchess County, New York 197 NLRB No. 2 LOCAL 445, TEAMSTERS parties. Respondent stipulated to amend its answer to admit paragraphs 2, 3, and 8 of the complaint. The parties further stipulated that they wished to waive a hearing before a Trial Examiner and the issuance of a Trial Examiner's Decision and that they desired to submit these cases for findings of facts, conclusions of law, and order directly by the Board. The Board issued an Order Granting Motion, Approving Stipu- lations and Transferring Proceeding to the Board on January 13, 1972. Thereafter, briefs were duly filed by Respondent, by Blount, and jointly by Local 201, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO, herein called Plumb- ers Local 201, and Road Local 669, United Associa- tion of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO, herein called Plumbers Local 669. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYERS The complaint alleges and Respondent's answer admits that: 1. Blount is, and has been at all times material herein, a corporation duly organized under, and existing by virtue of, the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal office located in Mont- gomery, Alabama, where it is engaged in the construction industry as a general contractor. At all times material herein, Blount, pursuant to contracts valued in excess of $18 million with IBM has been engaged in the construction of Buildings 330-C and 707. In the performance of these contracts, Blount annually received, or caused to be received, materials and supplies valued in excess of $50,000 directly from outside the State of New York. 2. At all times material herein, Frank A. McBride Co., herein called McBride, has been engaged in the construction industry as a plumbing and heating contractor, with its principal office in Paterson, New Jersey. McBride, in the course of its business, has been engaged, pursuant to a contract with Blount, in performing plumbing, heating, and ventilation work at the Building 330-C site. The value of its contract is approximately $4 million. 3. At all times material herein, C. B. Strain and Son, Inc., herein called Strain, has been engaged in 47 the construction industry as a plumbing and heating contractor, with its principal office in Poughkeepsie, New York. Strain, in the course and conduct of its business, has been engaged, pursuant to a contract with Blount, in performing plumbing, heating, and ventilation work at the Building 330-C site. The value of its contract is approximately $200,000. 4. At all times material herein, Automatic Sprink- ler Corporation of America, herein called Automatic Sprinkler, has been engaged in the fabrication and installation of fire protection systems, with its principal place of business in Cleveland, Ohio. Automatic Sprinkler, in the course and conduct of its business, has been engaged, pursuant to a contract with Blount, in the installation of fire protection systems at the Building 330-C site. The value of its contract is approximately $185,000. 5. At all times material herein, Mid-Hudson Automatic Sprinkler Co., Inc., herein called Mid- Hudson, has been engaged in the fabrication and installation of fire protection systems, with its principal place of business in Poughkeepsie, New York. Mid-Hudson, in the course and conduct of its business, has been engaged, pursuant to a contract with Blount, in the installation of fire protection systems at the Building 330-C site . The value of its contract is approximately $7,000. 6. At all times material herein, A. Ricci & Bros., Inc., herein called Ricci, has been engaged in the fabrication and installation of sheetmetal ventilation ducts and systems, with its principal place of business in Thornwood, New York. Ricci, in the course and conduct of its business, has been engaged, pursuant to a contract with McBride, in the installa- tion of sheetmetal ventilation ducts and systems at the Building 330-C site. The value of its contract is approximately $150,000. 7. At all times material herein, J. P. Primiano & Sons, Inc., herein called Primiano, has been engaged in the construction industry as a general contractor, with its principal place of business in White Plains, New York. Primiano, in the course and conduct of its business, has been engaged, pursuant to a contract with Blount valued at approximately $525,000, in performing concrete work at the Building 707 jobsite. 8. At all times material herein, Mechanical Construction Corp., herein called Mechanical, has been engaged in the construction industry perform- ing plumbing, heating, air conditioning, and ventila- tion work and has its principal place of business in Poughkeepsie, New York. Mechanical, in the course and conduct of its business, has been engaged, pursuant to a contract with Blount valued at approximately $2 million, in performing the plumb- ing, heating, and ventilation work at the Building 707 jobsite. 48 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 9. At all times material herein, Elmsford Sheet Metal Works, Inc., herein called Elmsford, has been engaged in the business of fabrication and installa- tion of duct work for heating, ventilating, and air- conditioning systems and has its principal office in Peekskill, New York. Elmsford, in the course and conduct of its business, has been engaged, pursuant to a contract with Mechanical valued at approxi- mately $679,000, in the fabrication and installation of duct work for the ventilating systems at the Building 707 jobsite. 10. At all times material herein, Virginia Metal Products, a Division of Gray Manufacturing Co., herein called Virginia Metal, has been engaged in the construction industry in the installation of metal partitions, with its principal office in Orange, Virginia. Virginia Metal, in the course of its business, is engaged, pursuant to a contract with Blount, in the installation of movable metal partitions at the Building 707 jobsite. The value of said contract is approximately $380,000. 11. At all times material herein, The Sheris Company, herein called Sheris, has been engaged in the construction industry in the installation of institutional food service equipment, with its princi- pal office in Falls Church, Virginia. Sheris, in the course of its business, is engaged, pursuant to a contract with Blount, in the installation of kitchen equipment at the Building 707 jobsite. The value of said contract is approximately $145,000. 12. At all times material herein, Modern Scaffold Co., herein called Modern, with its principal place of business located at South Fallsburgh, New York, has been engaged in the delivery of scaffolding to Blount at the Building 707jobsite. 13- At all times material herein, Neptune World Wide Movers, herein called Neptune; Roe Movers, herein called Roe; Patterson-Kelly Co., herein called Patterson-Kelly; Spiromatic Corp., herein called Spiromatic; Old Colonial Trucking Co., herein called Old' Colonial; and Mural Transport Co., herein called Mural, have been engaged in the transporta- tion of goods and materials to the Building 330-C and/or Building 707 jobsites. Respondent admits and we find that Blount, McBride, Strain, Automatic Sprinkler, Mid-Hudson, Ricci, Primiano, Mechanical, Elmsford, Virginia Metal, Sheris, Modern, Neptune, Roe, Patterson- Kelly, Spiromatic, Old Colonial, and Mural are now, and have been at all times material herein, persons and employers engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 2(6) and (7) and 8(b)(4) of the Act. 11. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The complaint alleges, Respondent's answer ad- mits, and we find that Respondent, Plumbers Local 201, Plumbers Local 669, Local 38, Sheet Metal Workers' International Association,'AFL-CIO, here- in called Sheet Metal Workers, and International Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local Union No. 203, AFL-CIO, herein called Carpenters, are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. Background and Facts of the Disputes Blount and IBM entered into a contract dated August 7, 1969, whereby Blount was to be the general contractor for the construction of Building 707. Under this contract, Blount was to furnish all of the labor, materials, tools, equipment, and services required to perform all of the construction work on the building. In performance of its contractual obligations to IBM, Blount entered into 28 subcon- tracts with other employers who were to perform work on certain portions of the project. On February 3, 1969, Blount entered into a contract with IBM concerning Building 330-C. Included in Blount's obligations under this contract is what is commonly known as fit-up work, as well as the actual construction work on the building. Fit-up work means receiving and installing into completed parts of the structure equipment furnished by IBM so that the various portions of the building can be occupied by IBM employees. In addition, certain parts of the structure were to be "accepted" by IBM even before the entire building was completed. Blount entered into 17 subcontracts with other employers who were to perform work on the Building 330-C project. There are four ways in which construction and other materials arrived at the IBM jobsites: (1) By trucks owned by individual subcontractors and driven by their employees; (2) by trucks owned by general commodity trucking companies, referred to herein as common carriers; (3) by moving vans owned by moving companies delivering IBM-owned material to Building 330-C to be installed in portions of the building still under Blount's supervision under the fit-up portion of its contract with IBM; and (4) by moving vans owned by moving companies delivering IBM-owned material to Building 330-C to be installed in portions of the building "accepted," or occupied, by IBM and thus under IBM's, and not Blount's, supervision. On April 1, Blount sent to Respondent and to all of the other labor organizations involved herein a letter LOCAL 445, TEAMSTERS which outlined the way in which the work involved in moving equipment into Buildings 707 and 330-C was to be distributed among the members of these labor organizations. After Blount sent the above letter, Frank J. O'Neil, labor relations manager for Blount, contacted Ca- pone, a representative of the Eastern Conference of Teamsters, who suggested a meeting with O'Neil on April 12. During this meeting, which was attended by inter aka O'Neil, Capone, and Theodore Daley, secretary-treasurer of Respondent, Daley said that the work of taking equipment from moving vans and delivering it into a building was traditionally the work of teamsters and if teamsters did not receive this work, he (Daley) would shut the job down. The next day, April 13, a truck owned by Roe carrying IBM-owned hoods and sinks, which plumb- ers were to install, arrived at Building 330-C. Chet Davis, vice president of Respondent, asked O'Neil if teamsters were to unload the truck. O'Neil replied in the negative. During the day Daley called O'Neil on three occasions and stated that if anyone other than Respondent's members unload the Roe truck, the job would be shut down. This truck finally left the jobsite without being unloaded. Again on April 13, a truck belonging to Spiromatic arrived at Building 330-C with a load of building material consigned to Ricci, who employs sheetmetal workers. While these employees were unloading this truck, Respondent's official, Daley, arrived and stated that sheetmetal workers could not go onto the bed of the truck and directed the driver of the truck to leave the dock. The truck returned sometime later and was unloaded by teamsters. On April 14, O'Neil had another conversation with Daley in which Daley stated that Blount had to build a warehouse and unload everything delivered to the IBM jobsites using teamsters. On April 15, a truck belonging to Old Colonial arrived at Building 330-C with a load of pipe consigned to Automatic Sprinkler. Michael Tierney, Respondent's coordinator for Building 330-C, re- fused to let the driver of this truck back up to he loading dock while Automatic Sprinkler's foreman was present. When Automatic's foreman left the dock to arrange for members of Plumbers Local 669 to unload the truck, teamsters unloaded the truck by throwing the pipe on the dock. This resulted in bundles of pipe being broken and their threads being bent and damaged. On April 17, a common carrier delivered to Building 707 a shipment of forms consigned to Primiano. Leo Clark, Respondent's coordinator for Building 707, refused to allow laborers employed by Primiano to unload the truck. At or around the same time, Clark told Charles Vann, Blount's project 49 manager for Building 707, that unloading of all material was teamsters' work and that Blount would have to employ additional teamsters to do the unloading of all material delivered to the job. When the president of Primiano protested this action to Clark, Clark stated that teamsters were going to do the unloading on the job or nobody was and that, if any other employees attempted unload- ing, he would shut the job down. On April 18, Jerry Ahik, Blount's mechanical and electrical 'coordinator for Building 330-C, met with Davis and Daley to discuss the current difficulties in unloading trucks. Daley again said that in the unloading and handling of equipment delivered to the jobsite he would require Blount to build a separate warehouse to receive its equipment and that, if teamsters were not given the work of unloading, the job would be halted. On April 20, Davis spoke to Vann, Blount's Building 707 project manager, and stated that teamsters were to unload all material that arrived on the job no matter to whom the material was consigned. Vann stated that members of the other labor organizations involved herein had been un- loading construction material consigned to their employers in the past and that this is the way unloading would be handled in the future. On April 20, Mechanical delivered material to Building 707 in one of its own pickup trucks. While Mechanical's employees were unloading this truck, Respondent's Coordinator Clark told Mechanical's foreman that teamsters were claiming the work of unloading the construction material delivered in subcontractors' trucks, as well as that delivered by common carriers. There were four shipments to Building 707 by common carrier on April 21 which upon arrival forthwith left the jobsite without being unloaded due to the actions of Respondent's Coordinator Clark. One of these shipments was a hot water heater consigned to Mechanical. Clark refused to allow members of Plumbers Local 201 to get on the bed of the truck and told the truckdriver not to let anyone other than teamsters help in the unloading. Another shipment involved pipe consigned to Mechanical. Clark stepped up to the driver of this truck and spoke to the driver a short while; the truck then left the dock unloaded. Similarly, sheetmetal workers were not allowed to unload a shipment of fans. The final shipment involved scaffolding consigned to Modern. Clark told Vann that he (Clark) would not allow these scaffolds to be unloaded unless the work was performed by teamsters. On May 1, a Petition for Injunction against Respondent under Section 10(1) of the Act was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern 50 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD District of New York. An Order Granting Temporary Injunction issued on May 20. On November 12, during a move of IBM-owned equipment by Neptune into Building 330-C, William Purcell, Blount's project manager, who was on the loading dock, directed Neptune's employees to leave a sink on the dock so that plumbers could move it into the building. Ed Nee, foreman for Neptune, said that his orders were to move all equipment into the building and leave nothing on the dock. When questioned by Purcell as to why Neptune was changing the way in which these moves had been handled. Nee said that the decision had been made by higher authorities of Neptune. Later during November 12, Purcell spoke to Jack Trotta, Nee's superior. Trotta said that all of Neptune's employees are members of Respondent and that he had his orders from Respondent not to leave any of the equipment on the dock. Tierney, Respondent's coordinator, was present. during this conversation and said nothing to dispute Trotta's remarks. On November 27, during a move of IBM-owned equipment by Roe, Purcell told Steve Trocan, driver for Roe, to leave certain equipment on the dock so that members of other labor organizations could move it into the building. Trocan told Purcell that he would not leave the equipment on the dock, that teamsters would either move it all into the building or the material would be returned unloaded. Mem- bers of Respondent moved a portion of the shipment into Building 330-C, but that equipment which Purcell insisted be left on the dock was placed in the moving van and returned to its origin. On December 7, a truck belonging to Virginia Metal made a delivery to Building 707. When- this truck arrived at the loading dock, Respondent's coordinator, Clark, told Virginia Metal's superin- tendent that the truck was not going to be unloaded unless teamsters did the work. At the same time, there was a truck belonging to a common carrier parked at the dock. When Virginia Metal's superin- tendent got on this common carrier truck, Clark told him to get off and said that he (Clark) could not stop members of Carpenters from unloading Virginia Metal's truck but that he was going to stop them from unloading common carriers. A short time after this incident, Virginia Metal's superintendent spoke to Respondent's official, Davis, and said that the unloading of these common carrier trucks was carpenters' work. Davis replied that carpenters would unload these trucks over his (Davis') dead body. On December 8, a shipment of kitchen equipment was delivered to Building 707 by common carrier. A member of Sheet Metal Workers employed by Sheris informed Vann, Blount's project manager, that the driver of the truck was having trouble unloading. Vann asked Respondent's coordinator, Clark, if the reason he would not allow the truck to back up to the dock was because the driver was not current in his obligations to Respondent. Clark replied that this was none of Vann's -business. Vann said that members of Sheet Metal Workers and Plumbers Local 201 were going to unload the truck. Thereupon Clark said that nobody but teamsters was going to perform this work. The next day, December 9, another load of material consigned to Sheris arrived at Building 707 by common carrier. Clark refused to allow the driver of this truck to back up to the loading dock. Vann showed Clark a copy of the temporary injunction that had previously issued in this matter. Clark said that that injunction didn't mean a thing. Vann stated that Clark was subject to imprisonment and a fine if he didn't follow the injunction. Clark replied that if Vann touched the truck or laid a hand on it, he (Vann) would not get back to Alabama alive. The truck left the jobsite fully loaded. On January 18, 1971, a load of metal partitions consigned to Blount was delivered to Building 707 in a truck belonging to Virginia Metal. Clark asked Vann if he was going to use members of Respondent to unload this equipment Vann replied that mem- bers of Carpenters would unload the truck as they had done in the past. Clark said that Blount was not going to get the material unloaded if it did not use teamsters. Later during the day, this truck left the jobsite without being unloaded. B. Respondent's Responsibility for the Above- Mentioned Conduct In its answer, Respondent admits that Daley and Davis are its agents but denies the alleged agency status of Coordinators Clark and Tierney. These coordinators were hired by Blount only after Blount was informed by Respondent that work could not begin on the IBM projects until a Teamster coordinator was on the job. The extent of the duties to be performed by these coordinators is not entirely clear from the record. Apparently they performed no physical work themselves, but were usually on hand to check for Respondent whenever a teamster made a delivery to the IBM jobsites. Coordinator Tierney testified in the 10(k) proceeding that his duties included being present when deliveries were made and alerting the consignee of the shipment so that he (the consignee) could sign the required documents to accept the goods. We are persuaded that in light of the activities of Coordinators Clark and Tierney described above in LOCAL 445, TEAMSTERS the section of this Decision entitled "Background and Facts of the Disputes," they exercised considerable authority on behalf of Respondent. Thus, on April 15 Tierney refused to allow the driver of an Old Colonial truck to back up to Building 330-C while Automatic's foreman was present. Once Automatic's foreman left the dock, teamsters unloaded the truck. On April 17 Clark likewise refused to allow members of labor organiza- tions other than Respondent to unload a truck at Building 707 and claimed this work for teamsters. Clark then threatened to shut the job down unless his demands were met. Clark engaged in similar activity on one occasion on April 20 and on four occasions on April 21. On December 7 Clark told Virginia Metal's superintendent that one of its trucks would not be unloaded unless teamsters did the work. When Virginia Metal's superintendent complained to Da- vis, Respondent's secretary-treasurer, Davis con- firmed Clark's actions by stating that carpenters would unload the truck over Davis' dead body. When Clark refused to allow a teamster to back his truck up to the Building 707 dock on December 8, Vann, Blount's project manager, asked him why. Clark replied that that was none of Vann's business and stated that nobody but teamsters was going to perform the work of unloading. Clark engaged in similar activity on December 9 and on January 18, 1971. With respect to the December 9 incident, Clark threatened Vann with physical violence if his commands were not obeyed. From the foregoing, we conclude that Clark and Tierney were acting in concert with and on behalf of Daley and Davis in Respondent's attempts to coerce the employers involved herein, as well as their employees. Not only did Respondent fail to disavow the above-described activity of Clark and Tierney, but on occasion these activities were expressly approved. Accordingly, we conclude that Clark and Tierney have been, and are now, agents of Respon- dent, acting on its behalf, and are agents within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the Act. C. The Determination of the Disputes On September 16, 1971, the Board issued its Decision and Determination of Disputes, assigning the work of (1) unloading from the truck to the ground or the dock all materials and equipment delivered to IBM Buildings 707 and 330-C by trucks owned by common carriers or by individual subcon- tractors, and (2) handling and distributing to the 5 See Local 1291, International Longshoremen 's Association and Interna- tional Longshoremen 's Association (Pennsylvania Sugar Division, National Sugar Refining Company), 142 NLRB 257, International Printing Pressmen 51 point of installation inside the unaccepted portions of Building 330-C all nondelicate equipment which ultimately requires installation by employees repre- sented by labor organizations other than Respondent to the employees represented by said labor organiza- tions. The Board also found that Respondent was not entitled, by means proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act, to force or require Blount, or its subcontractors, to assign the disputed work to employees who are represented by Respondent. D. Respondent's Refusal To Comply In addition to its threats and other coercive conduct in April, November, and December 1970, and January 1971, Respondent has refused, and continues to refuse, to comply with the Board's Decision and Determination of Disputes, issued pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act, which provides that it is not entitled to force or require Blount or any of its subcontractors to assign the disputed work to employees it represents. On the basis of the foregoing, and the entire record in this proceeding, we find, as described above, that Respondent, by its threats and other conduct, as well as its refusal to comply with the Board's Decision and Determination of Disputes, violated Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(D) of the Act. In reaching this conclusion; we note that none of the above-men- tioned conduct was ever specifically denied by Respondent. The only defense which Respondent raised in its brief in the instant matter was a contention that this activity was undertaken by Respondent "in pursuance of its lawful right to preserve its traditional unit work. ..." Thus, Respondent contends that the Board erred in its assignment of the disputed work made in the 10(k) proceeding. We find these arguments to be lacking in merit and they raise nothing not previously consid- ered by the Board.5 IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of Respondent set forth in section III, above, occurring in connection with the employ- ers' operations described in section I, above, have a close, intimate, and substantial relationship to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of com- merce. and Assistants ' Union of North America, AFL-CIO (Kelley & Jamison, Inc), 150 NLRB 842 52 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD V. THE REMEDY Having found that Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(D) of the Act, we shall order that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the purposes of the Act.6 The Board, upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and the entire record, makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Blount Brothers Corporation; Frank A. McBride Co.; C. B. Strain and Son, Inc.; Automatic Sprinkler Corporation of America; Mid-Hudson Automatic Sprinkler Co., Inc.; A. Ricci & Bros., Inc.; J. P. Primiano & Sons, Inc.; Mechanical Construction Corp.; Elmsford Sheet Metal Works, Inc.; Virginia Metal Products, a Division of Gray Manufacturing Co.; The Sheris Company; Modern Scaffold Co.; Neptune World Wide Movers; Roe Movers; Patterson-Kelly Co.; Spiromatic Corp.; Old Colonial Trucking Co.; and Mural Transport Co. are persons and employers engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) and 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act. 2. Local 445, International Brotherhood of Team- sters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America; Local 38, Sheet Metal Workers' Interna- tional Association, AFL-CIO; Road Local 669, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO; Local 201, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe Fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO; and Interna- tional Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Local Union No. 203, AFL-CIO, are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 3. Respondent has violated and is violating Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(D) of the Act by inducing and encouraging individuals employed by persons engaged in commerce and in an industry affecting commerce to engage in a strike and a refusal in the course of their employment to use, manufacture, process, transport, and otherwise handle and work on any goods, articles, materials, and commodities and to perform services, and by threatening, coerc- ing, and restraining persons engaged in commerce and in an industry affecting commerce, where an object thereof was and is to force or require Blount Brothers Corporation and its subcontractors to 6 Blount, in its brief, requests that a broad order issue against Respondent Blount raised similar arguments in its brief to the Board in the 10(k) proceeding, contending that the Board's award should be extended to assign to employees represented by Respondent, rather than to employees represented by other labor organizations, the work of (1) unloading from the truck to the ground or the dock all materials and equipment delivered to IBM Buildings 707 and 330-C by trucks owned by common carriers or by individual subcontractors, and (2) handling and distributing to the point of installation inside the unaccepted portions of Building 330-C all nondeli- cate equipment which ultimately requires installation by employees represented by labor organizations other than Respondent. 4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the mean- ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that Respondent, Local 445, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, its officers, agents, and representatives, shall: 1. Cease and desist from refusing to comply with the Board's Decision and Determination of Disputes, or (1) inducing or encouraging individuals employed by persons engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce to engage in a strike or a refusal in the course of their employment to use, manufac- ture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities, or to perform services, or (2) threatening, coercing, or restraining persons engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce, where an object thereof is to force or require Blount Brothers Corporation, or any of its subcontractors, to assign to employees represented by Respondent, rather than to employees represented by other labor organizations, the work of (1) unloading from the truck to the ground or the dock all materials and equipment delivered to IBM Buildings 707 and 330-C by trucks owned by common carriers or by individual subcontractors, or (2) handling or distributing to the point of installa- tion inside the unaccepted portions of Building 330-C all nondelicate equipment which ultimately requires installation by employees represented by labor organizations other than Respondent. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act: all future projects in the area For the reasons expressed in our Decision and Determination of Disputes, Blount's request for a broad order is hereby denied LOCAL 445, TEAMSTERS (a) Post at its business office and meeting halls copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." 7 Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 3, after being duly signed by Respondent's representative, shall be posted by Respondent 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 Respon- dent to insure that said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (b) Furnish the Regional Director for Region 3 with signed copies of such notices for posting by the employers involved herein, if willing, in places where notices to employees are customarily posted. (c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 3, in writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith. 7 In the event that this 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 " APPENDIX NOTICE TO MEMBERS POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government WE WILL NOT refuse to comply with the Board's Decision and Determination of Disputes award- ing the work of (1) unloading from the truck to the ground or the dock all materials and equip- ment delivered to IBM Buildings 707 and 330-C by trucks owned by common carriers or by individual subcontractors, or (2) handling and distributing to the point of installation inside the unaccepted portions of Building 330-C all nondel- 53 icate equipment which ultimately requires instal- lation by employees represented by other labor organizations; WE WILL NOT induce or encourage individuals employed by persons engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce to engage in a strike or a 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 services; and WE WILL NOT threaten, coerce, or restrain persons engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce, where, in either case, an object thereof is to force or require Blount Brothers Corporation, or any of its subcontractors, to assign the above-mentioned work to employees represented by us rather than to employees represented by other labor organiza- tions. By Dated LOCAL 445, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA (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 compli- ance with its provisions may be directed to the Board's Office, Ninth Floor, Federal Building, 111 West Huron Street, Buffalo, New York 14202, Telephone 716-842-3106.