Intl. Assn. of Machinists, District No. 10

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 30, 1979

246 N.L.R.B. 628 (N.L.R.B. 1979)

DE2(CISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARI)
District No. 10 of the International Association of Ma-
chinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO and
Pabst Brewing Company and Carpenters District
Council of Milwaukee County and Vicinity of the
United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of
America. AFL-CIO. Case 30 CD- 82
November 30. 1979
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN FANNIN(; ANI) MIMBiKRS PENIII(1
AND TRUESI)AILI
Upon a charge filed on January 8. 1979, by Pabst
Brewing Company, herein called Pabst, and duly
served on District No. 10 of the International Associ-
ation of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, AFL
CIO, herein called the Machinists or Respondent. the
General Counsel of the National Labor Relations
Board, by the Regional Director for Region 30, issued
a complaint on June 29, 1979, alleging that Respon-
dent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor
practices affecting commerce within the meaning of
Sections 8(b)(4)(ii)(D) and 2(6) and (7) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, as amended. With respect
to the unfair labor practices. the complaint alleges in
substance that Respondent violated the Act by failing
and refusing to comply with the terms of the Board's
Decision and Determination of Dispute in a 10(k)
proceeding.' In its answer dated July 9, 1979, Re-
spondent denied the commission of any unfair labor
practices.
On September 14, 1979, counsel for the General
Counsel filed directly with the Board a Motion for
Summary Judgment, submitting that Respondent in
its answer, raises no issues which were not previously
considered and decided by the Board in the 10(k) pro-
ceeding, and that Respondent is precluded from relit-
igating these matters. On September 20, 1979, the
Board issued an order transferring the proceeding to
the Board and a Notice To Show Cause why the Gen-
eral Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment should
not be granted. On October 2, 1979, Respondent filed
a response to the Notice To Show Cause.
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.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding, includ-
ing the record in the 10(k) proceeding and the Board's
Decision and Determination of Dispute therein, the
Board makes the following:
I District No. 10 of the International Association of Machiniss and .4Aero-
space Workers, AFL CIO (Pabst Brewing (ompany). 242 NLRB 318 11979).
Ruling on the Motion for Summary Judgment
Pursuant to Section 10(k) of' the Act, following a
charge filed by Pabst alleging that Respondent had
violated Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(D) of the Act, a hearing
was held on February 15, 1979. On May 17, 1979, the
Board issued a D)ecision and Determination of Dis-
pute finding that there was reasonable cause to be-
lieve that Section 8(h)(4)(D)) had been violated by Re-
spondent, and that there was no agreed-upon method
for the voluntary settlement of the dispute to which
all parties were bound. Concluding, therefore, that it
was not precluded from making a determination of'
the merits of the dispute within the meaning of Sec-
tions 8(b)(4)(D) and 10(k) of the Act, the Board de-
cided that the employees of' Pabst who were repre-
sented by Carpenters District Council of Milwaukee
County and Vicinity of the United States Brother-
hood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL
CIO, herein called the Carpenters, were entitled to
perform the work in dispute, rather than employees
represented by Respondent.
In its answer to the complaint, Respondent admits
that, by letter dated May 23, 1979, it informed the
Regional Director for Region 30 that it would not
comply with the Decision and Determination of Dis-
pute issued on May 17, 1979, but claims that the De-
cision and Determination of Dispute was erroneously
decided, and further denies that it has engaged in
conduct violative of Section 8(h)(4)(ii)(D) of the Act.
The issues raised by Respondent have previously
been litigated, and there is no issue which is properly
litigable in this proceeding. 2 As all material issues are
admitted by Respondent's answer to the complaint'
or have been decided previously by the Board.4 there
are no matters requiring a hearing. Accordingly, the
General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment is
granted.
I Local 40, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workersr. A. (10
(F & B/(Ceo of California. Inc, e al.), 205 N.RB 730 1l973).
1 In its answer, Respondent denies that item 23 of the 1960 jurisdictional
agreement among the parties herein provides that all cnveyors, except
table top chain" convesors shall he assigned to millwrights represented by
the Carpenters This particular fact, however. was specially tound by the
Board in its Decision and Determination of Dispute. 242 NLRB at 319.
Respondent has presented no evidence to demonstrate that the Board's fac-
tual finding was incorrect.
In the 10(k) proceeding, Respondent stipulated that on or about January
8. 1979. it made a threat to Pabst that it would engage in a strike in further-
ance of its claim and that the work in dispute should be assigned to emplo-
ees represented by Respondent. In addition. Respondent admits. in its n-
swer to the complaint, that an bject of its acts and conduct is I