General Drivers & Dairy Employees, Local 563

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 2, 1969

179 N.L.R.B. 822 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

822 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
General Drivers and Dairy Employees , Local Union
563 and its agent Jeffrey Curtin ; International
Union of Operating Engineers , Local 139 and its
agent Donald Shaw and Fox Valley Construction
Materials Suppliers Association , Inc. Case
30-CC-112
December 2, 1969
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
BROWN AND ZAGORIA
On August 11, 1969, Trial Examiner Marion C.
Ladwig issued his Decision in the above-entitled
proceeding, finding that Respondents had engaged in
and were engaging in certain unfair labor practices
within the meaning of the National Labor Relations
Act, as amended, and recommending that they cease
and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative
action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's
Decision. Thereafter, Respondents and the General
Counsel filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's
Decision and supporting briefs and the Charging
Party filed an answering brief.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel.
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial
Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no
prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are
hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Trial
Examiner's Decision, the exceptions, the briefs, and
the entire record in this case, and hereby adopts the
findings, conclusions, and recommendations' of the
Trial Examiner.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board adopts as its Order the
Recommended Order of the Trial Examiner, and
hereby orders that Respondents, General Drivers
and Dairy Employees, Local Union 563 and its
agent, Jeffrey Curtin; International Union of
Operating Engineers, Local 139 and its agent,
-We agree with the Trial Examiner that a broad order is justified in this
case because of the Teamsters and Operating Engineers earlier violations
of the secondary boycott provisions of the Act, as found by the Board in
General Drivers and Dairy Employees Local Union 563, et a! (Fox Valley
Material Suppliers Association , Inc I. 176 NLRB No 51 Additionally, we
note that broad orders have also issued against these same Unions in
General Teamster , Warehouse and Dairy Employees . Local No 126, et al,
175 NLRB No. 86, and in General Drivers and Dairy Employees, Local
Union 563 & Fox Valley Construction Materials Suppliers Association,
Inc, 179 NLRB No 109. However, the Trial Examiner inadvertently
failed to conform the Notices in Appendices A & B with the broad
language of his recommended Order We therefore amend the Notices to
provide therefor
Donald Shaw, Appleton, Wisconsin, its officers,
agents, and representatives, shall take the action set
forth in the Trial Examiner's Recommended Order,
as herein modified:
1. Amend the first indented paragraph of
Appendix A and Appendix B to read:
WE WILL NOT induce or encourage employees
of Edward Kraemer & Sons, Great Northern
Container Corp., or of any other person engaged
in commerce, or in an industry affecting
commerce, to refuse, in the course of their
employment, to perform services, with an object
of forcing or requiring the aforesaid persons, or
any others to cease doing business with Courtney
& Plummer, Inc., with any other member of Fox
Valley Material Suppliers Association, Inc., or
with any other person.
2. Add as the second indented paragraph of
Appendix A and substitute for the second paragraph
of Appendix B, the following language:
WE WILL NOT threaten, coerce or restrain
Edward Kraemer & Sons, Great Northern
Container Corp., or any other person engaged in
commerce or in an industry affecting commerce,
with an object of forcing or requiring it to cease
doing business with Courtney & Plummer, Inc.,
with any other member of Fox Valley
Construction Materials Suppliers Association, or
with any other person.
TRIAL EXAMINER 'S DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
MARION C. LADwiG, Trial Examiner- This case was
tried at Oshkosh, Wisconsin, on June 3, 1969,' pursuant
to a charge filed on April 25, and amended on April 29,
by Fox Valley Construction Materials Suppliers
Association, Inc , herein called the Association, against
the Respondents (General Drivers and Dairy Employees,
Local Union 563, herein called the Teamsters, its agent,
Jeffrey Curtin, and International Union of Operating
Engineers, Local 139, herein called the Operating
Engineers, and its agent, Donald Shaw), and pursuant to a
complaint issued May 7.
The primary employer, Courtney & Plummer, Inc ,
herein called C & P, was the general contractor on the
Highway 41 Project, where the Teamsters and Operating
Engineers began picketing in July 1968, when they went
on strike against C & P and other members of the
Association Edward Kraemer & Sons, Inc , herein called
Kraemer, was the bridge construction subcontractor on
the job. in April, after the winter shutdown, Kraemer
resumed work, using entrances reserved for the
subcontractors The two Unions picketed the reserved
entrances. On June 4 (1 day after the trial of this case),
the Board rejected, in an earlier proceeding, the Unions'
contention that Kraemer was not a neutral employer.
The main issues are (a) whether the Unions' picketing
at the reserved entrances on this project (and the
Teamsters' picketing at a reserved gate on a smaller
project) were for an unlawful secondary objective, and (b)
whether the appeal to Kraemer's employees and the threat
'All dates, unless otherwise indicated, are in 1969
179 NLRB No. 131
GENERAL DRIVERS & DAIRY EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 563 823
to continue picketing were also unlawful , in violation of
Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended.
Upon the entire record, including my observation of the
demeanor of the witnesses , and after due consideration of
the briefs filed by the General' Counsel, the Respondents,
and the Association, I make the following-
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYERS AND THE UNIONS
INVOLVED
C & P, a Wisconsin corporation, is engaged in
Appleton, Wisconsin, in the business of furnishing
building materials to the building and construction
industry, and annually sells products valued in excess of
$1 million to enterprises which are themselves employers
engaged in commerce or in industries affecting commerce
As general contractor on the Highway 41 Project, it has a
contract with the State of Wisconsin for a price in excess
of $1 million to construct the highway interchange About
April 25 and thereafter, it was also engaged at the
Appleton plant of Great Northern Container Corp., herein
called Great Northern, extending a driveway, building a
culvert, and supplying engineered fill, for a contract price
in excess of $7,000. Great Northern, a Wisconsin
corporation, is engaged in manufacturing corrugated
shipping containers and plastic formed items, and
annually purchases goods valued in excess of $50,000
directly from outside the State. Kraemer, a Wisconsin
corporation, was engaged as a bridge construction
subcontractor of C & P at the Highway 41 Project for a
contract price in excess of $150,000. The Association, a
Wisconsin corporation with its principal offices in
Appleton, is engaged in collective bargaining on behalf of
C & P and other employer- members. The Union admits,
and I find, that C & P and other employer-members of
the Association, Great Northern, and Kraemer are
employers engaged in commerce or in industries affecting
commerce as defined in Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act,
and that the Teamsters and Operating Engineers are labor
organizations within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the
Act.
II. THE ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Highway 41 Protect
1. Neutrality of Kraemer
As in the earlier proceeding (involving the Teamsters,
Operating Engineers , another union , and their agents),
General Drivers and Dairy Employees Local Union 563,
et al (Fox Valley Material Suppliers Association, Inc.),
176 NLRB No. 51, the Respondents contend that
Kraemer was not an independent contractor, and that it
was "subject to any lawful primary activity to which the
acknowledged primary employer [C & P] is susceptible."
In that earlier case, the Board adopted Trial Examiner
Robert E. Mullin's finding that the relationship between C
& P and Kraemer on the Highway 41 Project "was
substantially that of contractor and subcontractor in the
conventional sense ," and that Kraemer was an
independent contractor . The evidence in the present case
(being much the same as the evidence introduced on the
matter in the earlier case ) clearly supports that finding.
Accordingly, I find that Kraemer was a neutral employer
on the Highway 41 Project
2. Ticketing at reserved entrances
On Monday, April 21, following the winter shutdown,
C & P began preparations for the resumption of work on
the Highway 41 Project by placing crushed stone on the
driveways. The following afternoon, it sent letters to the
Teamsters and the Operating Engineers, notifying them
that separate gates, Nos. 1 and 2, would be established for
its own use, and Nos. 3, 4, and 5 for the "employees and
suppliers" of other employers - clearly referring to
Kraemer and other subcontractors There is no contention
that the "reserved gate" signs were ambiguous or
misleading . On April 23, the signs were posted at the five
driveways, which Teamsters picket Albert Pelz admitted
were the only accessible entrances to the project, because
of the many ditches and the absence of roads. The same
day, Kraemer resumed work on the project, under its
subcontract to construct four bridges at the highway
interchange.
Using neutral Gates 3 and 4, Kraemer employees
worked on April 23 and 24. On both days, the Teamsters
and Operating Engineers confined their picketing to
primary Gates l and 2. However on Friday, April 25, the
Unions began picketing also at neutral Gates 3 and 4, and
inside neutral Gate 5. (The Teamsters picket signs read on
one side, "Fox Valley Material Suppliers Association, On
Strike, Teamsters Local 563," and on the other side, "Our
Only Dispute is With Fox Valley Material Suppliers
Association." The Operating Engineers' picket signs read
"On Strike" against the Association.) The two Unions
coordinated their picketing on this project On April 24,
Operating Engineers Business Representative William E.
Stillman told Kraemer crane overator Richard W. Yanke
at the project that there was "liable to be picketing the
next day." On April 25, a Teamsters picket line was
placed at the neutral Gate 3, the entrance which Yanke
had been using
Kraemer's employees refused to cross the picket lines.
Being unable to perform the work, Kraemer signed a
release of its subcontract on May 12, and C & P took
over the bridge construction with its own employees.
The morning after Kraemer removed part of its
equipment from the project but left its crane, Teamsters
picket Pelz talked to Operating Engineers Business
Representative Donald Shaw at neutral Gate 4 In Pelz'
words, "I asked Shaw what we should do in case they
came after the crane and he said if they were coming after
it to let them take it, but if they wanted to bring anything
in, be sure and picket it strong." Pelz reported this
conversation to Teamsters Business Representative Jeffrey
Curtin (who had given instructions to picket the whole
project), and Curtin responded, "Good. As long as they're
taking it out and not bringing it in." When asked why
they were picketing at the Highway 41 Project (and also
as the Great Northern project, discussed later ), picket
Pelz testified that although not told outright, they "took it
for granted" that it was to keep the union contractors out,
"so as to get our [C & P] contract signed ." (Kraemer was
a union contractor, with a current agreement with the
Operating Engineers.) Pelz also testified that when he and
picket Kautz went to the union hall on April 25, Business
Representative Curtin "told us Kraemer was moving in
[at the Highway 41 Project] and we were supposed to go
over there and picket."
824 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
3. Appeal and threat
On Monday morning, April 28 (the second day the
neutral gates were picketed), Operating Engineers
Business Representative Shaw went to neutral Gate 3
where two Kraemer employees were present outside the
picket line. One of them, crane operator Yanke, asked
Shaw "if the strike pertained to us, if we were legal to go
in or not." Shaw told them that "if we went in, it would
make it that much harder to make a settlement," or
words to that effect. (This evidence by Yanke is
undisputed.)
Later that morning, Kraemer Project Engineer Joseph
L. Steffen telephoned Shaw and asked if the Operating
Engineers was striking, or had any dispute with, Kraemer
Shaw answered no, and Steffes said, "Well, we would like
to go in and build this bridge." Shaw responded, "If we
let you go in and work, we'll be destroying our bargaining
position with Courtney & Plummer." Steffes then asked
him "if the pickets would be on the site on future days,
and he replied yes, they would." When asked about
moving some of the equipment from the site, Shaw "said
he could arrange to have the pickets lifted when we
wanted to remove this equipment " (I discredit Shaw's
denials, and credit this testimony by Steffes, who
appeared to be a trustworthy witness.)
B. Great Northern Troject
From April 25 through May 7, the Teamsters picketed
across the entire rear entrance to the Great Northern
plant. The driveway had been divided into two sections,
with rope and iron stakes separating the west side (leading
to the rear loading dock) from the east side (leading to C
& P's construction area, where C & P was widening and
lengthening the driveway, building a culvert, and placing
engineered fill in preparation for an addition to the plant)
C & P had posted "reserved gate" signs, designating the
west side of the driveway as Gate 1 for the use of Great
Northern, and the east side as Gate 2 for C & P. On two
occasions, the Gate 2 entrance was enlarged to
accommodate large C & P trucks. All C & P employees
used Gate 2. There is no contention that the "reserved
gate" signs were either misleading or confusing
On the first day of the picketing, Teamsters Business
Representative Marvin DeVries instructed pickets Kautz
and Pelz to extend the picketing forward to the west
where union freight haulers were entering, because
"maybe they [union drivers] would recognize the [picket]
sign." The pickets did so for about an hour, and then
Teamsters Business Representative Curtin told them to
restrict the picketing to the driveway. The picketing
continued until C & P removed its equipment on May 7
C Contentions and Concluding Findings
The General Counsel and the Association contend that
the picketing near the neutral entrances at both the
Highway 41 Project and the Great Northern construction
site, the personal appeal and threat at the highway site,
and the picketing near the Great Northern motor freight
entrance were for the unlawful purpose of inducing
employees of Kraemer, Great Northern, and others to
withhold their services, to force the employers to cease
doing business with C & P.
In addition to their rejected contention that Kraemer
was not a neutral employer, the Respondents contend (a)
that Kraemer's bridge construction work at the Highway
41 Project was "related" to the normal operations of C &
P, the primary employer, in constructing the highway
interchange, entitling the Unions to subject both
employers to the same economic pressures, (b) that the
physical layout of the entrances to the two construction
sites did not "create the controlled, limited access
necessary to invoke the protections of a valid reserved
gate system"; and (c) that the "reserved gates" at both
sites were "contaminated, used by parties who were to be
excluded from them according to the signs "
In making the contention (a) about the work being
"related" at the highway site, the Respondents argue that
Building and Construction Trades Council of New
Orleans, AFL-CIO (Markwell and Hartz, Inc.), 155
NLRB 319, enfd. 387 F.2d 402 (C.A. 5), was erroneously
decided. They urge that the ruling in General Electric
case, Local 761, International Union of Electrical, Radio
and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO (General Electric Co )
v. N L.R B, 366 U S. 667, involving picketing at the
premises of a struck manufacturer, should be applied to
their strike activity at this construction project where the
general contractor was the primary employer, rather than
the more restrictive Moore Dry Dock standards, Sailors'
Union of the Pacific (Moore Dry Dock Co ), 92 NLRB
547, 549. The same position was taken by Member
Fanning, dissenting in part in the above-mentioned earlier
proceeding, 176 NLRB No 51, fn. 7, where his view was
stated that Kraemer and another subcontractor "were
performing work related to the normal operations of
Courtney and Plummer, Inc... who had contracted with
the State of Wisconsin to construct a highway interchange
on U.S. Highway 41, and that, consequently, appeals to
Kraemer and [another subcontractor] and their employees
asking them to honor the picket lines established in
furtherance of Respondents' dispute with Courtney and
Plummer constituted primary rather than secondary
appeals." The majority of the three-member panel in that
case held that the appeals were secondary. I therefore find
that although Kraemer's work on the highway project was
related to the work being performed by primary employer
C & P, the picketing, appeal, and threat directed
exclusively at Kraemer and its employees were secondary
(The Respondents do not contend that C & P's
construction work at the Great Northern site was related
to the normal overation of the plant )
Concerning the contention (b), the Respondents argue
that there were no fences or gates at the highway site,
"only poles with a sign attached," and that although the
driveway at Great Northern was divided by "a string
[rope] tied to a series of stakes," there was "a movable
saw-horse at the end nearest the public road," permitting
the divider to be moved to accommodate large trucks
entering the C & P side. However, the five driveways
where the reserved gate signs were posted at the highway
site were the only accessible entrances to the project, and
the divided driveway at the other site clearly separated the
plant entrance from the C & P entrance. I therefore reject
the contention, and find that the reserved entrances
adequately provided the controlled, limited access
necessary for establishing separate gates for primary and
secondary employers.
Concerning the remaining contention (c), that the
reserved entrances at both sites were "contaminated," this
contention is clearly a mere afterthought The picketing
was not extended to the neutral entrances because of any
claim that employees or suppliers of C & P were using
them. Moreover, there is evidence of only one instance of
an employee or supplier of C & P entering at a netural
GENERAL DRIVERS & DAIRY EMPLOYEES, LOCAL 563 825
gate. Teamsters Business Representative Curtin testified
that about I I a.m., April 25, a C & P truck entered Gate
5. (That was after Curtin had already given instructions to
picket the entire project.) Regardless of whether this one
instance would have justified picketing at Gate 5, it would
not have justified the picketing at neutral Gates 3 and 4,
which were being picketed despite their sole use by
employees of secondary employer Kraemer. (I further find
that there was no commingling of gates when a truck uses
the proper entrance, but turns around at another
entrance )
Having rejected the Respondent's defenses, I find that
the Teamsters and Operating Engineers on and after April
25 picketed near entrances reserved for neutrals at the
Highway 41 Project, for a secondary objective of forcing
Kraemer to cease doing business with C & P, in violation
of Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (i ► )(B) of the Act. I also find that
the Teamsters on and after April 25 picketed near the
entrance reserved for Great Northern, and on April 25
near the motor freight entrance, at the Great Northern
plant for a secondary objective of forcing Great Northern
to cease doing business with C & P, in violation of
Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B) of the Act. I further find that
on April 28, Operating Engineers' agent, Business
Representative Shaw, appealed to Kraemer employees to
cease work (by telling them that their working on the
highway project would make it harder for the Operating
Engineers to reach a settlement with C & P), in violation
of Section 8(b)(4)(i)( B), and threatened Kraemer with
continued picketing, in violation of Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B)
of the Act - both the appeal and the threat being for an
object of forcing Kraemer to cease doing business with C
& P.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. By picketing on and after April 25 near neutral
entrances to the Highway 41 Project, the Respondents
engaged in unfair labor practices affecting commerce
within the meaning of Sections 8(b)(4)(i) and ( ► i)(B) and
2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. By picketing on and after April 25 near the rear
entrance, and on April 25 near the motor freight entrance,
to the Great Northern plant, the Teamsters and Business
Representative Curtin violated Section 8(b)(4)(i) and
(i ► )(B) of the Act.
3 By appealing on April 28 to Kraemer employees not
to cross the picket line at the Highway 41 Project, the
Operating Engineers and Business Representative Shaw
violated Section 8(b) (4)(i)(B) of the Act.
4. By threatening Kraemer on April 28 with continued
picketing near the entrances reserved for neutrals at the
Highway 41 Project, the Operating Engineers and Shaw
violated Section 8(b) (4)(ii)(B) of the Act.
THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondents have committed
certain unfair labor practices, I shall recommend that they
be ordered to cease and desist from such conduct, and to
take affirmative action, which I find necessary to remedy
and to remove the effect of the unfair labor practices and
to effectuate the policies of the Act.
Because of the Teamsters' and Operating Engineers'
earlier violations of the secondary boycott provisions in
the Act, as found by the Board in the above-mentioned
General Drivers 563 case, 176 NLRB No. 51, I shall
recommend the issuance of broad orders.
Accordingly, on the basis of the foregoing findings and
conclusions , and on the entire record , I recommend
pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Act, issuance of the
following:
ORDER
A. Respondents, General Drivers and Dairy Employees,
Local Union 563, its officers, agents, representatives, and
successors, and Respondent, Jeffrey Curtin, its business
representative, shall.
1 Cease and desist from:
(a) Inducing or encouraging any employee of Edward
Kraemer & Sons, Inc., Great Northern Container Corp.,
or any other person engaged in commerce or in an
industry affecting commerce, to refuse to perform any
service in the course of his employment, with an object of
forcing or requiring the employer, or any other person, to
cease doing business with Courtney & Plummer, Inc.,
with any other member of Fox Valley Construction
Materials Suppliers Association, Inc, or with any other
employer or person.
(b) Threatening, coercing, or restraining Edward
Kraemer & Sons, Inc., Great Northern Container Corp.,
or any other person engaged in commerce or in an
industry affecting commerce, with an object of forcing or
requiring it to cease doing business with Courtney &
Plummer, Inc., with any other member of Fox Valley
Construction Materials Suppliers Association, Inc., or
with any other employer or person
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Post in conspicuous places in Respondent Union's
offices, meeting halls, and all other places where notices
to its members are customarily posted, copies of the
attached notice marked "Appendix A."2 Copies of the
notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for
Region 30, after being duly signed by authorized
representatives of the Respondent shall be posted by the
Respondents immediately upon receipt thereof, and be
maintained by them for 60 consecutive days thereafter.
Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondents to
ensure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or covered
by any other material Upon request of the Regional
Director, the Respondents shall supply him with a
sufficient number of signed copies for posting by Edward
Kraemer & Sons, Inc , by Great Northern Container
Corp., and by Courtney & Plummer, Inc., at all places
where notices to their respective employees are
customarily posted, if the employers desire to do so
(b) Notify the Regional Director for Region 30, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this
Decision, what steps the Respondents have taken to
comply herewith 1.
B Respondent, International Union of Operating
Engineers, Local 139, its officers, agents, representatives,
and successors, and Respondent, Donald Shaw, its
'In the event that this Recommended Order is adopted by the Board, the
words "This Notice is Posted by Order" shall be substituted for the words
"Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial Examiner" in the notice
In the further event that the Board's Order is enforced by a decree of the
United States Court of Appeals, there shall be added after the words "An
Agency of the United States Government" the words "as Enforced by the
United States Court of Appeals "
In the event that this Recommended Order is adopted by the Board,
this provision shall be modified to read "Notify the Regional Director for
Region 30, in writing, within 10 days from the date of this Order, what
steps the Respondents have taken to comply herewith "
826 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
business representative , shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Inducing or encouraging any employee of Edward
Kraemer & Sons, Inc , or any other person engaged in
commerce or in an industry affecting commerce, to refuse
to perform any service in the course of his employment,
with an object of forcing or requiring the employer, or
any other person , to cease doing business with Courtney
& Plummer, Inc., with any other member of Fox Valley
Construction Materials Suppliers Association, Inc., or
with any other employer or person.
(b) Threatening, coercing, or restraining Edward
Kraemer & Sons, Inc., or any other person engaged in
commerce or in an industry affecting commerce, with an
object of forcing or requiring it to cease doing business
with Courtney & Plummer, Inc , with any other member
of Fox Valley Construction Materials Suppliers
Association, Inc., or with any other employer or person.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act
(a) Post in conspicuous places in Respondent Union's
offices, meeting halls, and all other places where notices
to its members are customarily posted, copies of the
attached notice marked "Appendix B "' Copies of the
notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for
Region 30, after being duly signed by authorized
representatives of the Respondents, shall be posted by the
Respondents immediately upon receipt thereof, and be
maintained by them for 60, consecutive days thereafter.
Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondents to
ensure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or covered
by any other material . Upon request of the Regional
Director, the Respondents shall supply him with a
sufficient number of signed copies for posting by Edward
Kraemer & Sons, Inc., and by Courtney & Plummer,
Inc., at all places where notices to their respective
employees are customarily posted, if the employers desire
to do so.
(b) Notify the Regional Director for Region 30, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of the receipt of this
Decision , what steps the Respondents have taken to
comply herewith.'
IT IS ALSO ORDERED that the complaint be dismissed
insofar as it alleges violations of the Act not specifically
found herein
'See fn . 2, supra.
'See fn . 3, supra
APPENDIX A
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial
Examiner of the National Labor Relations Board an
agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT picket at entrances reserved for
Edward Kraemer & Sons, Great Northern Container
Corp., or any other employer, or otherwise appeal to
employees not to enter the reserved entrances, with a
purpose of forcing the employer to stop doing business
with Courtney & Plummer or any other company
Dated By
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS
Dated By
(Jeffrey Curtin , Business Representative)
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 may be directed to
the board's Regional Office, Second Floor Commerce
Building, 744 North Fourth Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
53203, Telephone 414-272-3872
APPENDIX B
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial
Examiner of the National Labor Relations Board an
agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT picket at entrances reserved for
Edward Kraemer & Sons, or any other employer, or
otherwise appeal to employees not to enter the reserved
entrances, with a purpose of forcing the employer to
stop doing business with Courtney & Plummer, or any
other company
WE WILL NOT threaten to picket entrances reserved
for Edward Kraemer & Sons or any other employer,
with a purpose of forcing the employer to stop doing
business with Courtney & Plummer, or any other
company.
Dated
Dated By
GENERAL DRIVERS AND
DAIRY EMPLOYEES,
LOCAL UNION 563
(Labor Organization)
(Representative ) (Title)
INTERNATIONAL UNION
OF OPERATING
ENGINEERS , LOCAL 139
(Labor Organization)
(Representative ) (Title)
(Donald Shaw , Business Representative)
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 may be directed to
the Board's Regional Office, Second Floor Commerce
Building, 744 North 4th Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin
53203, Telephone 414-272-3872.