Clark Construction Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 16, 1961

129 N.L.R.B. 1348 (N.L.R.B. 1961)

1348 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Clark Construction Company, Inc. and L. G. Wasson Coal Min-
ing Corp . (Joint Venturers ) and Chatahoochee Valley District
Council United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of
America, AFL-CIO; Local 926 International Union of Operat-
ing Engineers , AFL-CIO; Truck Drivers and Helpers Local
Union 728, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauf-
feurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America ; Construction
and General Laborers Local 246, International Hod Carriers'
Building and Common Laborers' Union of America, AFL-CIO,
Petitioners . Case No. 10-RC-4810. January 16, 1961
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon a petition' duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Joseph H. McLure, Jr.,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers herein to a three-member panel [Chairman
Leedom and Members Fanning and Kimball].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees of
the Employer.2
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act for the following
reasons:3
The Employer has been engaged in the construction of "stage 1" of
a powerhouse and overflow dam at the Walter F. George Dam project.
The Petitioners seek an immediate election among the Employer's pro-
duction and maintenance workers. At the time of the hearing the
Employer had completed 95 percent of that portion of the project com-
prising its base bid and expected to complete all of its work on Janu-
ary 24, 1961. The Employer stated at the hearing that it had laid
off 13 of its complement of 98 carpenters, that it planned to reduce its
labor force by 50 percent before November 15, 1960, and intended to
have no employees in the proposed unit by January 1961. Although
I The name of the Employer and the Petitioners appear as corrected at the hearing.
3 At the hearing, United Construction Workers, Division of District 50, United Mine
Workers of America, herein called the Intervenor , was allowed to intervene on the basis
of a contract interest
' In view of our decision herein we need not consider the contract -bar issue raised by
the Employer and Intervenor.
129 NLRB No. 158.
THE LOS ANGELES STATLER HILTON HOTEL 1349
the Employer intends to submit bids for future work at the same
project, it contends that success in obtaining such work is conjectural,
and that, in any event, as the timelag between the termination of the
present contract and the beginning of another project is approxi-
mately 3 months, it would not retain present employees in anticipation
of future employment.4
As the decrease in the Employer's operations and work force out-
lined above is not speculative in nature but rather is based on the
actual diminishing requirements of the construction job involved and
as there is a likelihood of a termination by the Employer of its present
operations at this project in January 1961 and as the resumption of
further work at this project is conjectural and would, in any event, in-
volve months of no activity by this Employer, we find that it would be
inconsistent with the provisions and policies of the Act to direct an
election herein. We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition.'
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
4 Subsequent to the hearing , the Petitioner filed with the Board certain affidavits in
which it is alleged the current work of the Employer will continue until about January 15
or February 1961, and that completion of the Employer 's work , should it be awarded an
additional contract , will take until April or May 1961 The Employer thereafter notified
the Board by letter that it objected to the Board 's consideration of the affidavits as not
being properly before the Board and also took issue with the alleged facts and informa-
tion set forth in the affidavits It is unnecessary to consider the specific issues raised by
the Employer in its letter , for, assuming that these affidavits are properly before us-a
matter we do not pass upon-they would not on their face warrant any modification of
the record evidence as set forth above . Insofar as they deal with current work they sup-
port substantially the evidence showing that such work will end in January 1961, and
insofar as they relate to work thereafter they are wholly speculative in nature.
5 See Douglas Motors Corp ., 128 NLRB 307.
The Los Angeles Statler Hilton Hotel and Office Employees
International Union Local No. 30 , AFL-CIO, Petitioner
The Beverly Hilton Hotel and Office Employees International
Union Local No. 30, AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Cases Nos. 31-RC-
6318 and 21-RC-6319. January 17, 1961
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9(c) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
Fred W. Davis, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds:
1. The Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act.
129 NLRB No. 166.