Local 146, IBEW

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 21, 1971

193 N.L.R.B. 844 (N.L.R.B. 1971)

844 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Local Union 146 , International Brotherhood of Electri-
cal Workers , AFL-CIO and Illinois Power Compa-
ny. Case 38-CD-56
October 21, 1971
DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF
DISPUTE
BY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND
KENNEDY
This proceeding under Section 10(k) of the National
Labor Relations Act, as amended , following a charge
filed by Illinois Power Company, hereinafter called
the Employer, alleging that Local Union 146, Interna-
tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO,
hereinafter called Local 146, had violated Section
8(b)(4)(D) of the Act. A hearing was held pursuant to
notice at Decatur , Illinois, on March 24 , 25, and 26,
1971, before Hearing Officer William G. Stack. The
Employer and Local 146 appeared at the hearing and
were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses , and to adduce
evidence bearing on the issues . The Employer filed 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
powers in connection with this proceeding to a three-
member panel.
The rulings of the Hearing Officer made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case , the Board makes
the following findings:
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Employer, Illinois Power Company, is an
Illinois corporation and a public utility engaged in the
business of providing electrical power to customers in
various areas of central and southern Illinois includ-
ing Decatur, Illinois. During the past 12 months the
Employer had a gross volume of business in excess of
$250,000. We find, in agreement with the parties, 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 agree , and we find , that Local 146 and
Local Union 51, International Brotherhood of Elec-
trical Workers , AFL-CIO, hereinafter called Local
51, are labor organizations within the meaning of
Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE DISPUTE
A. Background
The Employer employs only so-called outside
electricians, or electricians who work exclusively on
equipment owned, maintained, and repaired by the
Employer, as opposed to so-called inside electricians,
who work on equipment owned, maintained, and
repaired by the Employer's customers or by contrac-
tors working for those customers. Since the early
1920's the Employer has had contractual bargaining
relations with Local 51 covering a territory which
includes the nine county Decatur, Illinois, area, alone
involved in this proceeding, as well as with Locals 309
and 702 of the IBEW covering its other service areas;
in all cases, however, the contracts covered outside
electricians alone. The latest contract between the
Employer and Local 51 expired by its terms on June
30, 1971. The Employer has never contracted with
Local 146 or any other local of the IBEW which
represents inside electricians, nor has it ever had
inside electricians on its payroll.
B. The Work in Dispute
The work in dispute, described as secondary service
work, involves the installation of underground sec-
ondary electrical conductors, extending from the
secondary terminals of company-owned transformers
to the switch gear of the customer, which in the instant
case is the Decatur Housing Authority, Elderly
Housing project. The work entails the connection of
service conductors to the customer's switch gear. The
Employer's responsibility for installing secondary
electrical service terminates at the meter, provided by
the Employer, which is generally affixed within the
customer's building, and to which to customer
attaches its switch gear. Included in the service is the
attachment, to the meter, of small current transform-
ers to further reduce the current in the conductors to a
level which the switch gear can handle and meter
cable. The Employer owns, constructs, operates, and
maintains all of the secondary service equipment
except the underground conduits, which the customer
provides.
C. The Work Stoppage
The parties stipulated that there is reasonable cause
to believe that on December 15 and 16, 1970, a
representative of Local 146 stated to a representative
of the Employer that he would cause a stoppage of
work and did, in fact, cause a temporary stoppage of
work on the construction of the Decatur Housing
Authority, Elderly Housing project in Decatur,
Illinois, and that the object thereof was to force the
193 NLRB No. 125
LOCAL 146, IBEW
assignment of installation of underground secondary
service conductors to members of Local 146, em-
ployed by Hubbard Electrical Construction Compa-
ny, instead of members of Local 51, who are
employees of the Employer.
D. Contentions of the Parties
The. Employer contends that the work of installing
underground secondary service conductors, including
pulling in and connecting said conductors, should be
awarded to its outside electrician employees repre-
sented by Local 51, rather than inside electricians
represented by Local 146. Local 146 contends that
this work should be performed by the inside electri-
cians that it represents.
E. Applicability of the Statute
Before the Board may proceed 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) of the Act has been
violated. The record, in accord with the stipulation of
the parties, shows that on December 15 and 16, 1970,
Local 146 caused a work stoppage at the Employer's
jobsite because the disputed work had not been
assigned to employees represented by Local 146. We
therefore find reasonable cause to believe that Section
8(b)(4)(D) has been violated.
F. Merits of the Dispute
Section 10(k) of the Act requires the Board to make
an affirmative award of disputed work after giving
due consideration to various relevant factors. The
following are the factors relied on by the parties to the
dispute in support of their respective claims:1
1. Collective-bargaining contracts
Since the 1920's the Employer's contracts with
Local 51 have included the installation of primary and
secondary service within the Decatur area. Following
the temporary work stoppage herein, a line crew
represented by Local 51 completed the disputed work
pursuant to the contract. The Employer never had a
contract with Local 146, nor has it ever hired
employees represented by that labor organization.
2. Company, area, and industry practice
Cogent evidence adduced by the Employer indi-
cates that since 1966, when it commenced installing
i Local 146 contends that , apart from the merits of the dispute, the
disputed work belongs to employees represented by it, as employees of
Hubbard Electric Company, an electrical contractor which had performed
other work at the project and was prepared to perform the disputed work
when the Employer allegedly "bulled its way" into the project. In view of
845
secondary underground service, the Employer has
uniformly performed the disputed work in both
Decatur and its other jurisdictional areas, using crews
of outside electricians represented by Local 51 in the
Decatur area and by its sister locals 309 and 702 in the
other areas. This practice of the Employer of using its
own outside electricians for this work has been
followed in several other States of the United States,
including Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Kentucky, West
Virginia, Virginia, and Tennessee.
3. Employee skills and efficiency of
operations
The Employer's own outside line crews are well
trained for the work they are called upon to perform,
and although Local 146 employees are also fully
qualified electricians, the Employer's electricians
have the advantage of undergoing a training program
specifically geared to the Employer's method of
operating its Company-owned materials and equip-
ment.
By using its crews to construct and maintain its own
equipment in rendering its underground secondary
service, the Employer is able to maintain close
supervisory control over its own employees and
accountability for the proper performance of the
work; furnish more effective emergency service,
which the Employer, as a public utility, is obligated to
perform and a contractor is not; maintain more
flexible work assignments when the crew's work is
interrupted by weather or other unforeseen events
and more uniform safety rules geared to the specific
work to be performed. The Employer is thereby able
to effect substantial wage and other economies.
4. The IBEW "Decision"
Local 146 contends that a so-called "Decision" by
the IBEW International's vice president, stating that
the disputed work in the instant case properly
belonged to employees represented by Local 146,
either renders the Board without jurisdiction in the
instant case or is dispositive of the dispute. Absent
any expression of intent by the Employer at any time
to be bound by proceedings or decisions of the
International, or evidence that it at any time accepted,
or was consulted as to, the so-called "Decision" or
any proceedings related thereto, we find the conten-
tion without merit.2
uncontroverted evidence that the Employer was requested by the Housing
Authority to perform the specific work in dispute , we find the contention
without merit.
2 Decora, Inc, 152 NLRB 278.
846 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Conclusions
Upon the record as a whole, and after full
consideration of all relevant factors involved, we
believe that the Employer's assignment of the work in
dispute to employees represented by Local 51 should
not be disturbed. We shall therefore determine the
dispute before us by awarding the work of installing
underground secondary service conductors, including
pulling in and hooking up said conductors, to the
employees represented by Local 51, but not to that
Union or its members. This determination is limited
to the particular controversy giving rise to this
dispute.
DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
Pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, and upon the basis of the
foregoing findings, the National Labor Relations
Board hereby makes the following Determination of
Dispute:
1. Employees represented by Local Union 51,
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL-CIO, are entitled to perform the work of
installing underground secondary service conductors,
including pulling in and hooking up said conductors
on the Employer's jobsite located at 350 East Wagner,
Decatur, Illinois.
2. Local Union 146, International Brotherhood of
Electric Workers, AFL-CIO, is not and has not been
entitled, by means proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D) of
the Act, to force or require Illinois Power Company to
assign the above work to employees that it represents.
3. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision
and Determination of Dispute, Local Union 146,
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL-CIO, shall notify the Officer in charge of
Subregion 38, in writing, whether it will or will not
refrain from forcing or requiring Illinois Power
Company, by means proscribed by Section
8(b)(4)(D), to assign the work in dispute to employees
it represents rather than to employees represented by
Local Union No. 51, International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO.