Iron Workers, Local Union 377

906 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers Local Union 377, International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers, AFL-CIO and Judson Steel Corporation and Jones Allen Dillingham and Santa Fe-Pomeroy, Inc. and Piledrivers, Bridge, Wharf and Dockbuild- ers Local No. 34 affiliated with United Brother- hood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO. Cases 20-CD-373 and 20-CD-375 April 4, 1973 DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND KENNEDY This is a consolidated proceeding pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, following charges filed in Cases 20-CD-373 and 20-CD-375 by Judson Steel Corpo- ration i and Jones Allen Dillmgham,2 respectively. It is alleged in Case 20-CD-373 that Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers Local Union 377, International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers, AFL-CIO,3 violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act by engaging in certain proscribed activity with an object of forcing Santa Fe-Pomeroy, Inc.,4 to assign the work in dispute to employees represented by Iron Workers rather than to employees represented by Piledrivers, Bridge, Wharf and Dock Builders Local No. 34, affiliated with United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO.5 In Case 20-CD-375 it is also alleged that Iron Workers violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act by engaging in certain proscribed activity with an object of forcing SFP to assign the work in dispute therein to employees represented by Iron Workers rather than to employ- ees of SFP represented by Piledrivers. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer Gerald R. Lucey on October 5, 6, and 17, 1972. All parties appeared at the hearing and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to adduce evidence bearing on the issues. Thereafter, Iron Workers and Associated General Contractors of California, Inc.,6 filed briefs. 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. Hereinafter Judson 2 Hereinafter JAD 3 Name appears as amended at the hearing, hereinafter Iron Workers Hereinafter SFP The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Hearing Officer made at the hearing and finds that they are free from prejudicial error. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the briefs and the entire record in this proceeding and hereby makes the following findings: 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER SFP is engaged in the construction and manufac- ture of concrete products throughout the world. During the past calendar year, SFP had a gross volume of business in excess of $5 million and its California facilities annually purchased and received directly from outside the State of California goods valued in excess of $50,000. The parties stipulated, and we find, that SFP is engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and that it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The parties stipulated, and we find, that Iron Workers and Piledrivers are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. THE DISPUTE A. Background and Facts SFP, a subcontractor, was engaged in the installa- tion of prestressed precast hollow core floor panels at a building being constructed at 3rd and 16th Streets in San Francisco, called the Freight Forwarding Facility, a jobsite located about three blocks from San Francisco Bay. SFP awarded the work of setting the prestressed hollow core concrete floor slabs to the Piledrivers. Judson was also a subcontractor doing structural ironwork on the same building and it employed members of the Iron Workers. The general contractor on the project was North West Construc- tion Company; 7 the Facility was being built by the State of California for the Southern Pacific Compa- ny. The material used by SFP on the project is manufactured several miles away and cut in lengths of approximately 16 to 20 feet; it is 8 inches thick and 8 feet wide. The product has been used as slabs for floors, as well as for walls and roofs. In some circumstances, it has been used in multistory build- ings as the ceiling of one story and the floor of the one above it. Here, after several slabs are loaded on a truck, it is sent to the jobsite. SFP has a crew 5 Hereinafter Piledrivers 6 Hereinafter AGC, which represents SFP and the Charging Parties (Judson and JAD) Hereinafter Northwest 202 NLRB No. 150 IRON WORKERS, LOCAL UNION 377 consisting of two members of the Operating Engi- neers, one of whom operates a crane and the other an oiler. The crane, which is located on a truck, swings into position over the load of precast hollow core concrete slabs and is attached and rigged to the slabs by a crew of three members of the Piledrivers. They do the rigging, guiding, and placing of the slabs in place. Two members of the construction laborers place grout around the floor slabs after they have been laid. The Freight Forwarding Facility is a single-story building and the slabs are placed on piles. The Iron Workers contends that the rigging and placing of the slabs should be done by members of its local. On August 16, 1972,8 Frank Harrigan, general superintendent of SFP, spoke to Ray Fenton, business representative of Iron Workers, and he was informed by Fenton that it was his belief that SFP was in violation of its collective-bargaining agree- ment with the Iron Workers by allowing piledrivers to install the hollow core concrete slabs. Fenton ordered picketing and the ironworkers, who were employed by Judson, walked off the job and picketed the worksite on August 16, 17, and 18. The general contractor on the Embarcadero Hotel project at California and Drum Streets, San Francis- co, is Jones Allen Dillingham. Bay Cities Crane and Rigging,9 a subcontractor on that job, employed ironworkers. SFP's concrete products division sub- contracted with BCCR for the erection of precast concrete architectual members. On August 18 the ironworkers employed at the Embarcadero Hotel jobsite walked off the job in furtherance of the dispute created by SFP's assign- ment of the work to the piledrivers at the Freight Forwarding Facility location. The parties in Case 20-CD-375 agree that the work being performed by ironworkers at the Embarcadero Hotel is different from that performed by the piledrivers at the Freight Forwarding Facility jobsite and that there is no dispute over the assignment of work at the hotel site. On September 28, 1972, the National Joint Board rendered a decision in favor of the members of the Iron Workers on the Freight Forwarding Facility job. B. Work in Dispute The dispute involves the setting, including the aligning and releasing of clamps, of precast cement flooring planks by employees of SFP. 8 All dates are 1972 unless otherwise indicated 9 Hereinafter BCCR 10 Since AGC and SFP were not signatories to the Joint Board at the time of this proceeding , we find that the parties have not agreed upon a C. Contentions of the Parties 907 The Iron Workers contends that the work in dispute should be awarded to its members because it traditionally falls within the jurisdiction of the Iron Workers and there is an outstanding award by the National Joint Board for Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes in its favor. SFP and its representative, AGC, contend that the Board should sustain SFP's award of the disputed work to its employees represented by the Piledrivers, relying on such factors as its personal preference, and considerations of efficiency, economy, safety, and skill. Further, it asserts, the crew consisting of an operating engineer, oiler, and three piledrivers, has worked together for a period of over a year and a half and have developed techniques which allow them to work efficiently and economically. SFP and AGC claim they are not bound by the National Joint Board award in favor of the Iron Workers. AGC asserts that it is not signatory to the National Joint Board for Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes. D. Applicability of the Statute Before the Board proceeds with a determination of dispute pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act it must be satisfied that there is reasonable cause to believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) has been violated. The record shows that on August 16 Ray Fenton, business agent of the Iron Workers, claimed the work and advised SFP that it was disputing its assignment of the work to the Piledrivers. Picketing by the Iron Workers took place at the Freight Forwarding Facility on August 16, 17, and 18 over the failure of SFP to assign the work to the Iron Workers. On these facts we find that the Iron Workers threatened to, and did, picket with an object of forcing assignment of the disputed work to the employees it represents, rather than to SFP's employees represented by the Piledrivers. Furthermore, on August 18, the Iron Workers caused a work stoppage on the Embarca- dero Hotel job in order to force and coerce SFP to change assignment of the work from members of Piledrivers to members of Iron Workers at the Freight Forwarding Facility job. On the basis of the entire record, 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 under Section 10(k) of the Act.iO voluntary method for the adjustment of the dispute Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers ' International Union of America, Local No 1, AFL-CIO (Lembke Construction Company of Colorado, Inc), 194 NLRB No 98 908 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD E. Merits of the Dispute Section 10(k) of the Act requires the Board to make an affirmative award of disputed work after giving consideration to various relevant factors. The Board has held that its determination in a jurisdictional dispute is an act of judgment based on common sense and experience, reached by balancing those factors involved in a particular case. 11 1. Certification and collective-bargaining agreements The record shows that none of the unions involved herein, nor any other labor organization, has been certified to represent any of SFP's employees. Through its membership in AGC, SFP is signatory to master agreements with the basic trades, including Iron Workers and Piledrivers. It is clear from the record that these factors alone do not support an award of the work to either Iron Workers or Piledrivers. 2. Company and industry practice The record shows that SFP assigned the work to the members of the Piledrivers because, it contends, it is primarily a piledriver company. The Iron Workers contends that its members have historically erected precast, prestressed concrete hollow core floor slabs. The evidence, however, shows that there is a major difference between the erection of floor slabs traditionally done by ironworkers and the use of floor slabs here. Most precast, prestressed hollow core floor slabs are used as roof or floor members in concrete block or structural steel multistory build- ings. In the instant case the floor slabs were placed on caps and piles, rather than columns and beams. The operation consists of driving piles and forming caps alongside the piles, then placing hollow core planks on the piles creating a wharf or pierlike structure one story high. Thus, since the work in dispute does not come within that traditionally performed by ironworkers in the industry, we find that the Company's practice supports an award in favor of piledrivers. 3. Relative skills, efficiency, and economy of operations SFP favors an award to its employees represented by the Piledrivers because of their skills and their availability to SFP. The work involves rigging and guiding the product into its final place on the piles. The record reveals that SFP's crew has worked 11 International Association of Machinists, Lodge No 1743, AFL-CIO (J A Jones Construction Company), 135 NLRB 1402 together for more than a year and that its members have the requisite skills to perform the work efficiently and economically. We are persuaded that the factors of skill, efficiency, and economy of operations favor the award of the work to employees who are members of the Piledrivers. 4. The Joint Board award Although we do not consider the Joint Board award to members of the Iron Workers binding on the SFP,12 we consider it a factor in determining the proper assignment of the work in dispute. In view of all of the circumstances, we are of the opinion that the Joint Board award should not be given control- ling weight herein, particularly since it appears to be presumed on a method that was not used on the facility undergoing construction in this case. Conclusion Upon the entire record in this proceeding and after a full consideration of all of the relevant factors, in particular SFP's practice, the nature of the work involved, the skills required, and the economy and efficiency of operations, we conclude that the employees of the SFP who are members of, or are represented by, the Piledrivers are entitled to the work in question and we shall determine the dispute in their favor. In making this determination, we award the work to the employees of the SFP who are represented by the Piledrivers, but not to that union. DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE Pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and upon the basis of the foregoing findings and the entire record in this proceeding, the National Labor Relations Board hereby makes the following Determination of Dis- pute. 1. Employees employed by Santa Fe-Pomeroy, Inc., who are members of or represented by Pile Drivers, Bridge, Wharf and Dock Builders Local No. 34, affiliated with United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, are entitled to perform the work in dispute which involves the setting, including the aligning and releasing of clamps, of precast, prestressed concrete hollow core floor slabs at the Freight Forwarding Facility job at 3d and 16th Streets, San Francisco, California. 2. Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Work- ers Local Union 377, International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers, AFL-CIO, is not entitled by means proscribed by 12 Supra, fn 10 IRON WORKERS, LOCAL UNION 377 Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act to force or require Santa Fe-Pomeroy, Inc., San Francisco, California, to assign the above work to iron workers represented by it. 3. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision and Determination of Dispute, Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Workers Local Union 377, International Association of Bridge, Structural and 909 Ornamental Iron Workers , AFL-CIO, shall notify the Regional Director for Region 20, in writing, whether or not it will refrain from forcing or requiring Santa Fe-Pomeroy , Inc., by means pro- scribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D), to assign the work in dispute in a manner inconsistent with the above determination.