Carpenters, Local 1229

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 20, 1972

194 N.L.R.B. 640 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

640 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of
America, Display Workers Local Union No. 1229
and Shepard Decorating Company and Internation-
al Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees and
Motion Picture Machine Operators of the United
States and Canada , Local No. 41 . Case 10-CD-235
December 20, 1972
DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF
DISPUTE
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS
AND KENNEDY
This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, following
a charge by Shepard Decorating Company, herein
called the Company, alleging that United Brother-
hood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Display
Workers Local Union No. 1229, herein called
Carpenters, has violated Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(D)
of the Act by engaging in certain proscribed activity
with an object of forcing or requiring the Company to
assign certain work to employees represented by it
rather than to employees represented by International
Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees and Motion
Picture Machine Operators of the United States and
Canada, Local No. 41, herein called IATSE. Pursuant
to notice, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer
Thaddeus R. Sobieski on August 27 and 31, 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, all parties filed briefs which
have been duly considered. The Carpenters filed a
Motion To Quash and a Motion To Stay and
Consolidate with Cases 10-CA-8970 and
10-CB-1999. These motions are discussed below.
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.
The rulings of the Hearing Officer made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error. They are
hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board makes
the following findings:
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Company is engaged as a convention and trade
show service contractor in Atlanta, Georgia. During
the 12 months preceding the hearing, the Company
purchased from firms outside the State of Georgia
goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 which
were shipped directly to the Company in Atlanta.
We find that the Company is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act and that it will
effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurlsdlc-
tion herein.
H. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
IATSE and Carpenters are labor organizations
within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE DISPUTE
A. Background and Facts of the Dispute
The Company is engaged as a contractor in the
installation of prefabricated displays and exhibit
booths in convention and exhibit halls in Atlanta,
Georgia. The instant dispute arose at the Southeast-
ern Fair Grounds in Atlanta where the Company was
engaged in the installation of displays and exhibit
booths for the "Pine Forest Products" show.
In the course and conduct of its business operations,
the Company maintains a warehouse and a shop
where its employees receive a variety of products and
materials for use in making displays and exhibits.
There is no controversy concerning such work. The
work in dispute is that which takes place at the exhibit
sites away from the shop. The Company has had the
practice of assigning the work of handling the displays
and exhibits, and the setting up of stages, frames, and
display materials for trade shows to stagehands, who
are members of IATSE. The installation of prefabri-
cated displays includes hanging drapes, laying rugs
and carpets, installing and maintaining various
fixtures, lights, mechanical and electrical devices, and
disassembling exhibits, and repacking and transport-
ing them to other locations.
The stagehands use screwdrivers, pliers, staple guns,
hammers, and mat knives; in connection with their
work, they refer to blueprints and layout sketches. In
setting up exhibits, stagehands are often called upon
to work odd hours, because after one show closes the
Company is often required to service another show
scheduled to open at another location a few hours
later.
Since 1965 the Company has serviced about 300
shows and conventions using only stagehands who are
members of IATSE. At the time of the hearing,
IATSE and the Company had a collective-bargaining
agreement requiring the use of members of IATSE to
perform the disputed work.
In early April 1971, prior to the opening of the "Pine
Forest Products" show, the president of the Carpen-
ters, Hoyt B. Love, sent to the Company a proposed
collective-bargaining contract covering wages, hours,
and working conditions for carpenters even though
the Company did not employ carpenters to perform
194 NLRB No. 108
CARPENTERS, LOCAL 1229 641
the disputed work. The Company's representative,
Charles J. Lynch, contacted Love and was informed
by the latter that the Carpenters had been awarded
jurisdiction over the disputed work, and that he
expected the Company to sign the contract and to use
members of the Carpenters in the future. Lynch
informed Love that the Company had a collective-
bargaining agreement with IATSE and that the
Company intended to use members of that union.
During a later meeting, Love, according to Lynch,
threatened to picket the "Pine Forest Products" trade
show if the Company did not use members of the
Carpenters. Love denied the threat, although he
admitted saying that there was always a possibility
that pickets would show up on any job.
On April 18, 1971, the Company filed an unfair
labor practice charge against the Carpenters alleging a
violation of Section 8(b)(4)(D). On April 20, 1971, the
Carpenters in turn filed unfair labor practice charges
against the Company and IATSE, alleging that they
had unlawfully entered into a collective-bargaining
contract. On April 26 and 27, 1971, the Carpenters
picketed the site of the "Pine Forest Products" show,
where the Company was performing work. The
pickets carried signs stating that the Company and
IATSE had entered into a "sweetheart" contract and
that the Company discriminated against members of
the Carpenters.
B. The Work in Dispute
The work in dispute is the unpacking, assembling,
maintaining, and repacking of prefabricated exhibits
and/or displays at the "Pine Forest Products" trade
shows at the Southeastern Fair Grounds, Atlanta,
Georgia.
C. Contentions of the Parties
The Company and IATSE contend that the disput-
ed work belongs to members of IATSE who have
historically performed the work, that such employees
possess the craft skills and training to do the job, and
that the assignment is consistent with area practice. In
addition, IATSE contends that the Board's determi-
nation should apply to all shows and exhibits within
the geographic jurisdiction of the Carpenters.
The Carpenters contends that the work in dispute
should be awarded to its members because it is work
that is usually assigned to carpenters, and they have
done this type of work in the past on the local and
national level. The Carpenters also contends that this
I Local 46, Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers International Union,
AFL-CIO, et al (Precrete, Inc.), 140 NLRB 1, 7.
2 Local Union No. 3, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL-CIO (Western Electric Company, Incorporated), 141 NLRB 888, 893
3 N.L.R.B v Radio & Television Broadcast Engineers Union, Local 1212,
proceeding should be quashed because the picketing
was in protest of the unfair labor practices allegedly
committed by the Company and IATSE and not in
furtherance of any jurisdictional claims. The Carpen-
ters further contends that this proceeding should be
stayed and consolidated with unfair labor practice
proceedings in Cases l0-CA--8970 and 10-CB-1999.
D. Applicability of the Statute
Before the Board may proceed with a determination
of the 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.
We find no merit in the Carpenters motions to
quash this proceeding or to stay and consolidate it
with the other unfair labor practice cases. Although
the evidence is conflicting as to whether the Carpen-
ters threatened to picket the site of the trade show, the
record does show that the Carpenters picketed the site
for 2 days. We find, under all the circumstances,
including the attempt by the Carpenters to obtain the
disputed work for its members, that at least one object
of the picketing was to force assignment of the work in
dispute to carpenters.' Moreover, in a jurisdictional
dispute context, the Board is not charged with finding
that a violation of Section 8(b)(4)(D) has in fact
occurred, but only that there is reasonable cause to
believe that there was a violation. Without conclusive-
ly ruling on the credibility of the testimony as to the
threats preceding the picketing, we are satisfied 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.2
We find no merit in the Carpenters motion to stay
the present proceeding pending the outcome of Cases
10-CA-8970 and 10-CB-1999, now before a Trial
Examiner. The unfair labor practices alleged in these
two cases involve the legality of the present collective-
bargaining agreement between the Company and
IATSE. We find it unnecessary to, and do not, rely on
this agreement in making our assignment of the
disputed work. Accordingly, there is no necessity for
staying the present proceeding.
E. Merits, of the Dispute
Section 10(k) of the Act requires that the Board
make an affirmative award of the disputed work after
giving due consideration to various relevant factors .3
Certain of the usual factors considered by the Board
in these cases, such as Board certifications, arbitra-
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO [Columbia
Broadcasting System ], 364 U.S. 573; International Association of Machinists,
Lodge No. 1743, AFL-CIO (J. A. Jones Construction Company), 135 NLRB
1402, 1411.
642 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tion, and jurisdictional awards, have not been
developed in the record before us and therefore are
not available for our use as an aid in determining the
instant dispute.
1. Company and area practice
The record shows that since 1965 the Company has
serviced more than 300 conventions or trade shows in
the Atlanta area. At all of these shows it has hired only
stagehand employees who are members of IATSE to
perform the work in dispute. The record further shows
that about 80 percent of the business of installing
displays and exhibits in the Atlanta area was handled
by the Company, that 75 percent of the remaining
shows were serviced by two other companies, and that
all three companies hired employee-members of
IATSE to perform the type of work in dispute. Thus,
approximately 95 percent of all the disputed work in
the Atlanta area has been performed by employees
who are members of IATSE. This factor strongly
favors the Company's assignment.
2. Economy and efficiency
Members of IATSE have performed all of the work
in dispute to the Company's satisfaction for many
years. They have the skills and experience to perform
all aspects of the required work, including painting,
electrical work, hanging drapery materials, laying
carpet, etc., thus avoiding the need to hire a variety of
craftsmen. IATSE also offers a ready source of skilled
employees who oftentimes are required to work odd
hours to erect displays and exhibit booths. In
addition, the Company presented evidence to show
that the contract terms offered by the Carpenters, not
including wage scales, which are comparable, would
of necessity increase its hourly costs in that it would
require full 8 hours of pay per employee (even though
the job may last 4 hours or less), increased fees for
transportation of employees, and extra pay for job
stewards. We find that these factors of efficiency and
economy also favor the Company's assignment.
Conclusions as to the Merits of the Dispute
Having considered all pertinent factors present
herein, we conclude that employees represented by
IATSE are entitled to perform the work in dispute.
This award is consistent with the Company's assign-
ment, area and industry practice, and promotes
efficiency and economy of operation. Accordingly,
we shall determine the existing jurisdictional contro-
versy by awarding the work of installing, maintaining,
and repacking prefabricated exhibits and/or displays
to employees represented by IATSE, rather than to
employees represented by Carpenters. In making this
determination, we are awarding the work in question
to employees represented by IATSE, but not to that
labor organization or its members.
F. Scope of the Assignment
IATSE requests that the Board determination apply
to all future operations of the Company in the
Atlanta, Georgia, geographical area, contending that
this problem is likely to recur in the future. The
evidence before us supports such contention. Accord-
ingly, our determination will cover assignment of the
disputed work in the Atlanta area where the Company
operates and wherever the geographical jurisdiction
of the Carpenters and IATSE coincide.4
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 the
Dispute:
1. Employees of Shepard Decorating Company
who are represented by International Alliance of
Theatrical Stage Employees and Motion Picture
Machine Operators of the United States and Canada,
Local No. 41, are entitled to perform the work of
installing, maintaining, and repacking fabricated
exhibits and/or displays in the Atlanta, Georgia,
geographical area.
2. United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners
of America, Display Workers Local Union No. 1229,
is not entitled, by means proscribed by Section
8(b)(4)(D) of the Act, to force or require Shepard
Decorating Company to assign the above work to
carpenters represented by it.
3. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision
and Determination of Dispute, United Brotherhood
of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Display
Workers Local Union No. 1229, shall notify the
Regional Director for Region 10, in writing, whether
it will refrain from forcing or requiring Shepard
Decorating Company, by means proscribed by
Section 8(b)(4)(D), to assign the work in dispute to
employees represented by Carpenters rather than to
employees represented by IATSE.
4 Local Union No 3, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL-CIO (Western Electric Company, Incorporated), supra, In 2