IBEW and its Local No. 46

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 28, 1975

216 N.L.R.B. 821 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

IBEW AND ITS LOCAL NO. 46 821
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, and
its Local No. 46 and Sanford Productions , Inc. and
Studio Transportation Drivers, Local No. 399,
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauf-
feurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America.
Case 19-CD-220
February 28, 1975
DECISION AND ORDER
BY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND
KENNEDY
Upon charges filed on May 31, 1973, by Sanford
Productions, Inc., herein called the Employer, the
General Counsel of the National Labor Relations
Board, by the Regional Director for Region 19,
issued a complaint on May 15, 1974, against
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and
its Local No. 46, herein respectively called Respond-
ent IBEW and Respondent Local 46 and jointly
called Respondents , alleging that the Respondents
had engaged in and were engaging in unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(i) and
(ii)(D) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended.
In substance, the complaint alleges that the
Respondents violated the Act by engaging in
picketing and other activities at the Employer's
Seattle, Washington, location where it was engaged
in the filming of a movie with an object of forcing or
requiring the Employer to assign the work of starting,
monitoring , maintaining, and operating certain
portable generators housed in a mobile studio, which
are used to produce power for lighting and other
filmmaking equipment, to employees represented by
Respondents rather than to employees of the
Employer represented by the Studio Transportation
Drivers, Local No. 399, International Brotherhood of
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers
of America, herein called Teamsters. The Respond-
ents filed an answer admitting certain allegations of
the complaint and denying certain other allegations.
On July 8, 1974, the General Counsel, the Re-
spondents, and the Employer agreed to a stipulated
motion to transfer this case directly to the Board for
the issuance of findings of fact, conclusions of law,
and a Decision and Order, and thereby waived a
hearing before an Administrative Law Judge. It was
agreed that the record in the 10(k) proceeding is a
complete record, and that the charge, complaint,
answer , formal papers in the present proceedings,
and the record in the 10(k) proceeding constitute the
record and that no oral testimony is necessary.
Counsel for the General Counsel and Respondents
stipulate that the Respondents have declined to
216 NLRB No. 144
comply with the Board's determination reported in
209 NLRB 741 (1974), in which the work in dispute
was awarded to an employee represented by Team-
sters . On November 21, 1974, the motion, the formal
papers and other documents and exhibits described
in the motion were forwarded to the Board. The
Board granted the motion on November 27, 1974.
The Respondents filed exceptions and a 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
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Employer is engaged in the production of
motion pictures on location in various parts of the
United States with its principal place of business in
Los Angeles, California. In the course and conduct
of its business, the Employer annually purchases and
receives goods directly outside the State of California
which are valued in excess of $50,000.
We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act,
and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to
assert jurisdiction herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The parties stipulated, and we find, that IBEW, its
Local 46, and Teamsters Local 399 are labor
organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of
the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The Work in Dispute
The disputed work involves the starting, operation,
and maintenance of two electrical generators used to
produce power for lighting and other filmmaking
equipment. The generators operate independently of
each other, one being used primarily as a backup for
the other. To start the generator the operator opens
the air and exhaust pipes, flips a fuel switch, turns an
ignition key, allows the engine to idle for a minute,
and then adjusts knobs to regulate engine speed and
voltage. All of the controls are located in the cab of
the truck. Thereafter, the generators operate auto-
matically without maintenance or monitoring. To
stop the generator, the procedures are simply
reversed.
The Employer assigned the work in dispute to the
driver of the tractor, a member of the Teamsters.
822 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
This driver is the same individual who designed and
built the generator system, the operation and
maintenance of which is in dispute herein. The
Employer has a collective-bargaining agreement with
the Teamsters covering drivers. No collective-bar-
gaining agreement exists between the Employer and
the Respondents.
Almost immediately after the Employer's work
assignment , the Respondents demanded that the
disputed work be assigned to one of their members,
and threatened to picket if the demand was not met.
When the Employer rejected the demand, Respond-
ents placed a single picket at the jobsite who carried
a sign with the legend:
SANFORD PRODUCTIONS UNFAIR
REFUSES TO ASSIGN
ELECTRICAL WORK TO ELECTRICIANS
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD
OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS
We find on the basis of the above uncontroverted
facts that the demand for the work, the threat to
picket, and the picketing were attempts by the
Respondents to force the Employer to make the
assignment of the work in dispute to one of their
members.
B. The Respondents' Contentions
The Respondents' defense herein, as argued in
their brief,' is in the nature of a request for
reconsideration of the Board's Decision and Deter-
mination of Dispute issued in the 10(k) proceeding.2
They argue, inter alia, that the object sought by them
does not come within the purview of paragraph (D)
of Section 8(b)(4), which speaks in terms of work
assignment to "employees," because here the disput-
ed work involves a portion of the duties of a "single
employee" represented by the Teamsters. We do not
agree. It is clear under the rules of statutory
construction that "words importing the plural in-
clude the singular,"3 and, therefore, for purposes of
Section 8(b)(4)(D) the term "employees" does not
exclude a "single employee." As we previously noted
in our Decision and Determination of Dispute (209
NLRB No. 98), there is, moreover, no legal or
1 Briefs were not filed by the other parties . In the 10(k) proceeding, the
Teamsters disclaimed any interest in the disputed work. However, in the
circumstances , we find no basis to depart from our usual practice and give
no effect to such a disclaimer . See Local 40, International Brotherhood Of
Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO (F & B Ceco of Caltjornia, Inc.), 199 NLRB
903,904 (1972).
7 The Respondents submitted a motion for rehearing before the full
Board on March 21 , 1974, contending that the Decision and Determination
industrial relations reason for Congress to have
created such an artificial, legalistic distinction.4
Accordingly, we find no merit in this contention of
the Respondents.
We have examined other arguments raised by the
Respondents in support of their position. We find
nothing therein which was not previously raised and
considered by the Board. We, therefore, perceive no
reasons for disturbing our prior Decision and
Determination of Dispute.
On the basis of the foregoing facts and the entire
record in this case, we find that the Respondents'
conduct, including the picketing described above,
was for a proscribed object and in violation of
Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(D).
IV. THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent violated Sec-
tion 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(D) of the Act, we shall order it
to cease and desist therefrom and take certain
affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies
of the Act.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Sanford Productions, Inc., is engaged in
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7)
of the Act.
2. The Respondents and Teamsters Local 399 are
labor organizations within the meaning of the Act.
3. By its picketing at the Seattle, Washington,
location with an object of forcing or requiring the
Employer to assign certain work to an employee
represented by the Respondents rather than to an
employee represented by the Teamsters, the Re-
spondents have engaged in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(D) of
the Act.
4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair
labor practices affecting commerce within the mean-
ing of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondents,
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
and its Local No. 46, Seattle, Washington, their
officers, agents, and representatives, shall:
in 209 NLRB 741 was contrary to established Board and court precedent.
The motion was denied by the Board on April 5, 1974.
s See I U.S.C.A . } I (Cumulative Pocket Part, 1975, p. 6).
4 We find International Rice Milling, Co., Inc. v. N.LR.B., 341 U.S. 665
(1951), cited by the Respondents in support of their position inapposite
since in that case the Court was concerned with defining "concerted"
conduct and not with the scope of the term "employees" contained in
B(bx4XD).
IBEW AND ITS LOCAL NO. 46
1. Cease and desist from engaging in, or inducing
or encouraging individuals employed by Sanford
Productions, Inc., or any other person engaged in
commerce or in an industry affecting commerce to
engage in, a strike , or refusal in the course of their
employment to use, manufacture, process, transport,
or otherwise handle or work on any materials, or to
perform any services; and from threatening, coerc-
ing, or restraining the aforesaid person, where an
object is to force or require Sanford Productions,
Inc., to assign the work of starting, operating, and
maintaining certain portable generators housed in a
mobile studio used in connection with its filmmaking
to an employee represented by the Respondents
rather than to an employee represented by the
Teamsters.
2. Take the following affirmative action which
the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Post at their business offices, meeting halls, and
all other places where notices to members are
customarily posted in Seattle , Washington, copies of
the attached notice marked "Appendix."5 Copies of
said notice, on forms provided by the Regional
Director for Region 19, after being duly signed by
the Respondents' representatives, shall be posted by
the Unions immediately upon receipt thereof, and be
maintained by them for 60 consecutive days thereaft-
er, in conspicuous places, including all places where
notices to members are customarily posted . Reason-
able steps shall be taken by the Unions to insure that
said notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by
any other material.
(b) Sign and mail copies of said notice to the
Regional Director for Region 19 for posting by
Sanford Productions, Inc., the Employer willing, at
locations where notices to its employees are custom-
arily posted.
(c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 19, in
writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order,
what steps the Respondents have taken to comply
herewith.
823
S In the event that this Order is enforced by a Judgment of a United
States Court of Appeals, the words in the notice reading "Posted by Order
of the National Labor Relations Board" shall read "Posted Pursuant to a
Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board."
APPENDIX
NOTICE To MEMBERS
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National
Labor Relations Board and in order to effectuate the
policies of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, we hereby notify you that:
WE WILL NOT engage in, or induce or
encourage individuals employed by Sanford
Productions, Inc., or any other person engaged in
commerce, or in an industry affecting commerce,
to engage in a strike or refusal in the course of
their employment to use, manufacture, process,
transport, or otherwise handle or work on any
materials, or to perform any services; or threaten,
coerce, or restrain any other employer or persons
engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting
commerce, where in either case an object thereof
is to force or require Sanford Productions, Inc., to
assign the work described below to employees
who are members of or represented by us rather
than to employees represented by the Teamsters.
The work involved consists of. starting, operating,
and maintaining certain portable generators
housed in a mobile studio which are used to
produce power for lighting and other filmmaking
equipment.
INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF
ELECTRICAL WORKERS,
AND ITS LOCAL No. 46