Broadcast Employees Nabet Local 11 (National Broadcasting)

BROADCAST EMPLOYEES NABET LOCAL 11 (NATIONAL BROADCASTING) Local 11, National Association of Broadcast Em- ployees and Technicians, AFL-CIO and Nation- al Broadcasting Company, Inc. and Local 23, International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Em- ployees, AFL-CIO. Case 1-CD-782 30 March 1987 DECISION AND ORDER QUASHING NOTICE OF HEARING BY MEMBERS BABSON, STEPHENS, AND CRACRAFr The charge in this Section 10(k) proceeding was filed 3 June 1986 by the National Broadcasting Company, Inc. (the Employer or NBC) alleging that ]Local 11, National Association of Broadcast Employees and Technicians, AFL-CIO (Local 11) violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the National Labor Relations Act by engaging in proscribed activity with an object of forcing the Employer to assign certain work to employees it represents rather than to employees represented by Local 23, Internation- al Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees, AFL- CIO (IATSE). The hearing was held 13 November 1986 before Hearing Officer John T. Downs. The National Labor Relations Board has delegat- ed its authority in this proceeding to a three- member panel. The Board affirms the hearing officer's rulings, finding them free from prejudicial error. On the entire record, the Board makes the following find- ings. I. JURISDICTION NBC, a Delaware corporation, owns a radio sta- tion in Boston, Massachusetts, where it annually has gross revenues in excess of $100,000 and makes purchases in excess of $50,000 directly across state lines. The parties stipulated, and we fmd, that the Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and that both Local 11 and the IATSE are labor organiza- tions within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. II. THE DISPUTE A. Background and Facts of Dispute The Employer has a collective -bargaining agree- ment with Local 11 whose members travel with NBC-owned and leased equipment for remote broadcasts. NBC contracted with boxing promoter Dave Duma to televise a boxing match from the Providence Civic Center on 18 May 1986. NBC's director of staff labor relations David Heiser testi- fied that on 7 May 1986 he received a copy of a collective-bargaining agreement between the Provi- 417 deuce Civic Center Authority (PCC) and IATSE. He testified that Ernie De Rosa, NBC's technical manager of sports, obtained the contract at Heiser's request after De Rosa told him there might be a problem concerning who should perform the load- ing and unloading of NBC's technical equipment. According to unsworn statements on the record by Local 11's counsel, on 8 May 1986 Heiser received a phone call from PCC representative Robert Casey, who insisted that, pursuant to PCC's con- tract with IATSE, the work of loading and unload- ing NBC-owned technical equipment used for the boxing match must be given to IATSE. Local 11 and the Employer stipulated that some time around 8 May 1986 Local 11 Business Representative John Clark contacted Heiser and threatened to withhold all services if his members did not load and unload the equipment. De Rosa testified that the work was assigned to and performed by members of Local 11 on 18 May 1986. B. Work in Dispute The work in dispute is the loading and unloading of NBC-owned and leased technical equipment and NBC-owned lighting equipment for televised events at the Providence Civic Center. C. Contentions of the Parties NBC and Local 11 claim that whenever NBC is present at the Providence Civic Center the work in dispute should be awarded to employees represent- ed by Local 11 based on their collective-bargaining agreement, the skills and experience of employees Local 11 represents, industry practice, efficiency of operation, employer preference, and Board prece- dent. Neither NBC nor Local 11 filed a brief. PCC and IATSE did not appear at the hearing, nor did they file briefs. D. Applicability of the Statute We find that the record in this case is insufficient to establish a jurisdictional dispute cognizable under Section 10(k) of the Act. There is little or no evidence that NBC is faced with two or more competing employee groups claiming the work disputed above. No evidence was adduced at the hearing that IATSE contacted NBC or PCC about the work. Neither party present at the hearing alluded to this omission or lack of evidence concerning two employee group claims. At most, the parties have shown that NBC obtained a copy of a PCC-IATSE contract that purports to cover the work in dispute, and that an NBC representative speculated there might be a 283 NLRB No. 70 418 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD problem about what employees should perform the faced with competing employee group claims. We work.' further conclude that there is no jurisdictional dis- Accordingly, we conclude there is insufficient pute within the meaning of Sections 8(b)(4)(D) and evidence to support a finding that the Employer is 10(k) of the Act. We shall therefore quash the notice of hearing. i Further, even if we were to consider as evidence the unworn repre- ORDER sentation `of counsel for Local l i regarding the Heiser-Casey phone con- versation, we would still find the record insufficient to support a fording The notice of hearing is quashed. that the Employer is faced with competing employee group claims.