Glaziers Local 1162

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 24, 1972

195 N.L.R.B. 1032 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

1032 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Glaziers and Glassworkers Local 1162, Brotherhood of
Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-CIO and PPG
Industries, Inc. and Art Glass Workers Local 1210,
Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades, AFL-
CIO. Case 8-CD-221
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The parties stipulated, and we find, that the Re-
spondent and the Art Glass Workers are labor organi-
zations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
March 24, 1972
DECISION AND ORDER QUASHING NOTICE
OF HEARING
BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS FANNING
AND KENNEDY
This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, as amended, following
charges filed by PPG Industries, Inc., herein called the
Employer, alleging that Glaziers and Glassworkers Lo-
cal 1162, Brotherhood of Painters and Allied Trades,
AFL-CIO, herein called Respondent, has violated Sec-
tion 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act. A hearing was held before
Hearing Officer Curtis L. Mack, on January 5, 1972.
The Employer, Respondent, and Art Glass Workers
Local 1210, Brotherhood of Painters and Allied
Trades, AFL-CIO, herein called Art Glass Workers,
appeared at the hearing and were afforded full oppor-
tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine wit-
nesses, and to adduce evidence bearing on the issues.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The rulings of the Hearing Officer made at the hear-
ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, the Board
makes the following findings:
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The parties stipulated that the Employer, a Pennsyl-
vania corporation with its principal place of business in
Pittsburgh, is engaged in the manufacture and distribu-
tion of glass and related products. In the course and
conduct of its business at the Twinsburg, Ohio, plant
involved herein, it receives goods valued in excess of
$50,000 from, and has shipped goods valued in excess
of $50,000 to, points directly outside the State of Ohio.
Accordingly, the parties stipulated, and we find, that
the Employer is engaged in commerce within the mean-
ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and it will effectu-
ate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
III THE DISPUTE
A. Background and Facts
Prior to 1966, all prefabrication and assembly work
was performed by employees represented by the Art
Glass Workers and Glaziers and Glassworkers Local
181 within the confines of the Employer's Cleveland
plant. In 1966, when the Employer moved its plant to
Twinsburg, the International Brotherhood of Painters
and Allied Trades awarded jurisdiction of the plant to
the Art Glass Workers although the facility was
located within the territorial jurisdiction of the Re-
spondent. Since then, the Employer has consistently
used members of the Art Glass Workers to prefabricate
and assemble metal in the plant and has assigned to
members of the Respondent the installation of materi-
als at the jobsite.
On August 2, 1971, John Taylor, plant superinten-
dent, assigned two members of the Respondent to in-
stall metal frames and plate glass in the Beef `N Burger
fast-food restaurant in Streetsboro, Ohio. Shortly after
their arrival on the jobsite, the men telephoned Taylor
and said they could not install the frames because they
were received already fabricated. After checking with
his superior, Taylor informed the men that they would
either install the frames or go home. The evidence
shows that the two men left the site for the remainder
of that day, but did return to, work the next day. The
material was returned to the Twinsburg plant, disas-
sembled, and later installed at the site by members of
the Respondent. The job has now been completed.
B. Work in Dispute
The work in dispute involves the prefabricating and
assembling of metal which is used in the insatllation
and erection of glass doors, windows, and side views of
commercial establishments.
C. Contentions of the Parties
The Employer contends that members of the Art
Glass Workers should be assigned the work in dispute
on the basis of company and area practice and economy
and efficiency of operation . The Respondent contends
that the dispute is merely one of contractual interpreta-
tion between it and the Employer , that it has not en-
gaged in any dispute with the Employer or any other
labor organization with respect to the assignment of the
work in dispute, and that the refusal of the two em-
195 NLRB No. 190
GLAZIERS LOCAL 1162 1033
ployees to do the work was undertaken without its
consent, knowledge, approval, and/or ratification.
D. Applicability of the Statute
Before the Board proceeds with a determination of
a dispute pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act, it must
be satisfied that there is a reasonable cause to believe
that Section 8(b)(4)(D) has been violated. We are not
satisfied that such cause exists in this case.
In our opinion, the facts show only that two em-
ployees refused, on their own, to perform the work, and
they were suspended for the rest of the day. No further
pressures by either the Employer or the Union were
shown to have occurred before the Employer acted to
change its method of having the work done. It is uncon-
troverted that Respondent was unaware of the incident
until after its occurrence. "There is no indication that
the conduct was instigated or directed by the Respond-
ent or engaged in by agents, officers, or representatives
of the Respondent, or that it can be attributed to the
Respondent on any thoery of ratification thereof."' Un-
der these circumstances, we hold that the record evi-
dence is too insubstantial to support the necessary
finding that there is reasonable cause to believe a viola-
tion of Section 8(b)(4)(D) has occurred. The Board is,
therefore, without authority to determine this dispute
and we shall quash the notice of hearing herein.'
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the notice of hearing issued
in this case be, and it hereby is, quashed.
International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 18 and 18C,
AFL-CIO (The Wagner-Smith Company), 174 NLRB 396, 397-398.
In view of our determination that there is no reasonable cause to believe
that Respondent violated Section 8(b)(4)(D), we find it unnecessary to deal
with the other contentions of the parties.