Local 337, Carpenters

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 2, 1969

179 N.L.R.B. 808 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

808 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Local 337, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and
Joiners of America , AFL-CIO, and Carpenters'
District Council of Detroit , Wayne , Oakland,
Macomb, St. Clair, Monroe and Portions of
Sanilac and Livingston Counties , AFL-CIO and J.
B. Willer Co., Inc.
Local 337, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and
Joiners of America, AFL-CIO; Carpenters'
District Council of Detroit , Wayne and Oakland
Counties and Vicinity , AFL-CIO; AND
Carpenters and Pile Drivers Local No. 19, United
Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of
America, AFL-CIO and John Perrone , d/b/a John
Perrone Co . Cases 7-CC-492(3), 7-CC-492(1),
and 7-CC-492(2)
December 2, 1969
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND ZAGORIA
On June 18 , 1969, Trial Examiner Owsley Vose
issued his Decision in the above -entitled proceeding,
finding that Respondents , Local 337, AFL-CIO,
United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of
America, and Carpenters ' District Council of
Detroit , Wayne, Oakland , Macomb , St. Clair,
Monroe and portions of Sanilac and Livingston
Counties , AFL-CIO, had engaged in certain unfair
labor practices as alleged in the complaint, 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 filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's
Decision . The General Counsel filed exceptions to
the Trial Examiner ' s Decision , and a supporting
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 . They are hereby
affirmed . The Board has considered the Trial
Examiner' s Decision , the exceptions and brief, and
the entire record in this consolidated 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 hereby adopts as its Order the
Recommended Order of the Trial Examiner, and
hereby orders that the Respondents , Local 337,
United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of
America, AFL-CIO, and Carpenters ' District
Council of Detroit , Wayne , Oakland , Macomb, St.
Clair , Monroe , and portions of Sanilac and
Livingston Counties, AFL-CIO, their officers,
agents, and representatives , shall take the action set
forth in the Trial Examiner ' s Recommended Order.
TRIAL EXAMINER'S DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
OWSLEY VOSE, Trial Examiner. Upon a charge and an
amended charge filed by J. B. Willer Co., Inc (herein
called Willer Co ), on February 6 and 11, 1969,
respectively, a complaint was issued on February 20, 1969,
against the Respondent, Local 337, United Brotherhood
of Carpenters and Joiners of America, AFL-CIO (herein
called Local 337), and Carpenters' District Council of
Detroit, Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, St. Clair, Monroe
and portions of Sanilac and Livingston Counties,
AFL-CIO (herein called the District Council), alleging in
substance that they had violated Section 8(b)(4)(i) and
(ii)(B) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended,
by causing the employees of Willer Co. to refuse to
perform services. Thereafter, upon a charge and an
amended charge filed by John Perrone Co. (herein called
Perrone Co ), on February 4 and 6, 1969, respectively, a
consolidated complaint was issued on March 4, 1969,
against Local 337 and the District Council and against
Carpenters and Pile Drivers Local No 19, United
Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America,
AFL-CIO, alleging with respect to Local 337 and the
District Council' that they had further violated Section
8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B) of the Act by causing the employees
of Perrone Co. and others to refuse to perform services
The complaint issued upon the Perrone Co. charges was
then consolidated for hearing with the complaint upon the
Willer Co. charges, and the hearing was held before me at
Detroit, Michigan, on April l5 and 16, 1969
The Respondents called no witnesses in their behalf and
consequently the findings made below are based upon the
uncontradicted testimony of witnesses for the General
Counsel.
On May 23, 1969, the General Counsel and the
Respondents, Local 337 and the District Council, filed
briefs which have been duly considered by me.
Upon the entire record' and my observation of the
witnesses, I make the following.
FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
1. JURISDICTIONAL FINDINGS
Michigan Consolidated Homes, Inc. (herein called
Homes), is the wholly owned subsidiary of Michigan
Consolidated Gas Company (herein called Consolidated
Gas), a public utility providing gas service to customers in
the Detroit area. Homes was established by Consolidated
Gas to construct and develop low cost housing projects
pursuant to the urban renewal program of the United
States Government. Homes is presently engaged in the
construction of a multimillion dollar low cost Federal
'No evidence was adduced by the General Counsel in support of the
allegations of the complaint against Local No 19, and it is unnecessary
therefore to consider the allegations regarding it
'After the close of the hearing the General Counsel filed a motion to
correct record This motion, which is unopposed, is hereby granted, and
the record is deemed corrected as prayed in the General Counsel's motion
179 NLRB No. 133
LOCAL 337 , CARPENTERS 809
Housing Administration, Section 221 (d)(3), Below
Market Interest Rate housing project in the downtown
area of Detroit, Michigan This project is a part of the
nationwide Model Cities program, and large scale
participatory financing of the project is being effected by
the Department of Housing and Urban Development
Homes entered into an agreement with Bert L Smokier &
Company (herein called Smokier), whereby the latter
agreed to act as Homes' agent in letting subcontracts,
purchasing materials, maintaining cost control, and
generally supervising the construction of the housing
project.
Consolidated Gas in 1968 sold more than $50,000
worth of natural gas to its customers, of which in excess
of $50,000 worth was received by Consolidated Gas
directly from out-of-State sources.
Smokier, a Michigan corporation having its principal
office at Southfield, Michigan, is a developer and builder
of residential buildings in several States. During 1969
Smokier had gross revenues of more than $500,000 from
the construction of homes, and received in excess of
$50,000 for the construction of homes outside of
Michigan.
Willer Co., a Michigan corporation having its office
and principal place of business at Oak Park, Michigan, is
engaged in the construction industry as a carpentry
contractor During the fiscal year ending April 30, 1968,
Willer Co. purchased within the State of Michigan more
than $50,000 worth of building supplies which originated
outside the State of Michigan.
Perrone Co., a sole proprietorship, having its office and
principal place of business at Walled Lake, Michigan, is
engaged in the State of Michigan in the construction
industry as a carpentry labor contractor. Perrone Co. is a
member of Carpenter Contractors' Association of Detroit,
which bargains on behalf of its members with the District
Council, and Perrone Co.'s employees are currently
covered by a collective-bargaining contract between the
Association and the District Council. The members of the
Association annually purchase and receive in the
aggregate more than $50,000 worth of materials from
suppliers located outside of the State of Michigan, which
are shipped directly to the Association members' jobsites.
Upon the foregoing facts, I find that at all times
relevant herein Willer Co., Perrone Co., Consolidated
Gas, Homes, and Smokier have been and are persons
engaged in an industry affecting commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(1), (6), and (7) of the Act.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Model Cities program. Homes decided to act as its own
general contractor , utilizing the services of Smokier as its
agent in connection with obtaining bids, letting
subcontracts , and supervising and overseeing the
construction Homes, through Smokier, entered into a
contract with Carpentry Engineering , Inc (herein called
Carpentry Engineering ), to furnish rough and finish
carpentry labor, material, and hardware for the project.
Carpentry Engineering in turn contracted with John
Perrone Co . (herein called Perrone Co ) to furnish the
rough and finish carpentry labor for the project
John Perrone , the sole proprietor of Perrone Co , is the
vice president and treasurer of Carpentry Engineering, the
owner of 60 percent of the stock of Carpentry
Engineering , and the donor of the remaining stock to two
of Perrone ' s key employees , Jack Parcels and Ronald
Cotner, who each own 20 percent of Carpentry
Engineering ' s stock Further facts concerning the
interrelationship between Perrone Co and Carpentry
Engineering are set forth below
Carpentry Engineering manufactures prefabricated wall
sections (herein sometimes called panels ) at its Walled
Lake, Michigan , plant Carpentry Engineering planned to
and did furnish such prefabricated wall sections for
installation by Perrone Co. at the Detroit project in
fulfillment of this aspect of its contractual obligations to
Homes The employees of Carpentry Engineering who
make these panels in Carpentry Engineering ' s Walled
Lake plant are all members of Millmen's Local Union
No. 1452, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners
of America , AFL-CIO, which like Local 337, is affiliated
with the Respondent District Council. Carpentry
Engineering ' s plant employees are paid in accordance with
the scale provided in the labor agreement between the
Metropolitan Detroit Millmen's Association and the
District Council, expiring July 1, 1970. The employees of
Perrone Co are all members of Local 337 and they are all
paid the higher wage scale provided for in the agreement
for outside carpenters between the Carpenter Contractors'
Association of Detroit and the District Council.
The unfair labor practices here involved grow out of the
Respondents ' shutting down of Perrone's carpentry labor
operations at the project on January 21, 1969, and its
subsequent action in shutting down Willer Co ' s carpentry
labor operations at the project , after Perrone Co. had
been relieved of its carpentry labor subcontract and the
contract had been awarded by Homes to Willer Co.
2. The Respondents shut down the Perrone Co.
carpentry operations at the project on January 21, the
January 23 meeting to discuss the shutdown
Local 337, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and
Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, and Carpenters' District
Council of Detroit , Wayne , Oakland , Macomb, St. Clair,
Monroe and portions of Sanilac and Livingston Counties
are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5)
of the Act.
111. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. The Respondents ' Violations of Section 8(b)(4)(i)
and (ii )(B) of the Act
1. Introduction
As stated above, Homes is the owner of a tract of land
in Detroit which it is developing into a low cost housing
project as a part of the federally assisted nationwide
On January 20 Perrone Co.'s employees were setting
prefabricated wall sections manufactured by Carpentry
Engineering with a crane on building 8 of Homes' project.
A foreman of Perrone Co reported to the job
superintendent, Kenneth Aldrich, an employee of
Smokler's, that a Local 337 business agent had told him
that Perrone Co.'s employees would have to stop setting
these wall panels Perrone himself was called to the
project and was informed that the reason given was that
the crane lacked two guywires Perrone Co. had the men
stop erecting panels and transferred them to placing the
first floor joists and building the first floor on building 6
The next morning, January 21, William Powers, one of
the business agents of Local 337, came to the project
about 9 a.m After checking the membership cards of the
seven or eight carpenters who were working that morning,
810 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the business agent told the men to go home, that they
were not to work on the job any longer The carpenters
promptly left the project.
John Perrone, informed of the shutdown, called Powers
and asked why the job was shut down. Powers replied that
the job was unsafe. When Perrone inquired what was
unsafe , Powers stated "too many reasons to name" and
advised him to call John Harrington, the
secretary-treasurer of the District Council, and set up a
meeting with him. Powers further stated that Perrone
would "have to settle it with the District Council, he
couldn't do anything about it." Later that day Powers
called Perrone and told him that Harrington was going to
be out of town the next day, but that a meeting to settle
the dispute was scheduled for 8 a.m. the day after in
Secretary -Treasurer Harrington ' s office.
The meeting was held as scheduled. Besides John
Perrone , Secretary -Treasurer Harrington , and Business
Representative Powers, the meeting was also attended by
William Kohr, the assistant secretary of Homes, Jack
Parcels, superintendent for the Perrone Co., and president
of Carpentry Engineering, Richard Orrell, executive
secretary of Carpenter Contractors' Association of
Detroit, of which Perrone Co. was a member Powers
stated, "Your job is unsafe down there." Asked what was
unsafe , Powers mentioned something about "a plank and
a base" and said , "you're only using two cleats for a
ladder . There is a stairwell that doesn ' t have a railing
around it, and the terrain is unsafe." Perrone asked, "Can
we go down there in the morning and correct them?"
Harrington , waving the contract between the District
Council and the Carpenter Contractors' Association of
Detroit in front of Perrone, declared, "No, you are in
violation of this contract." Harrington refused to
elaborate in the presence of Kohr, the representative of
Homes, and indicated that Kohr should leave. Perrone
sought to have Kohr remain . However , the discussion
lagged as long as Kohr remained. Finally Kohr left. Then
Harrington explained , as Perrone testified:
You have a contract with us to employ carpenters and
you are employing millmen . I said, I don't have a single
millman on my payroll and Bill Powers said, Well,
you've got them out there in that other company.
Perrone ' s testimony regarding this conversation continues.
I said, We've been abiding by this contract for twenty
years. I said, You are the one who is in breach of
contract. It calls for twenty-four hour strike notice and
you didn ' t give me a strike notice and you didn't give
me a reason for a shutdown and you won't give us a
chance. to repair or correct the unsafe conditions. And
he said, Aw, come on, Perrone, let's cut this out. You
put two - one carpenter and two apprentices out there
on the job, right on the site. He said, You can put a
shed over it and you can build more panels than the
millmen can build . I said , Mr. Power , the reason we are
buying prefabricated panels is because we have a lot of
pilfering on our jobs , especially in the downtown area. I
said that 's why the builders are going into this
prefabricated , in order to save time and also pilfering
He said, All right, put one carpenter and two
apprentices out there in your shop and you won't have
any more trouble.
John Harrington kept saying, You've got - any
panels that are going to be built in this district are
going to be built by carpenters . I said, Why is Cardinal
Industries shipping them in here and National Homes
are shipping them in here ? I said , We erected
seventy-seven units in Keego Harbor by National
Homes, forty of them in April of 1968 before the strike
and the other thirty-six were in July after the strike and
I said, We never had a single violation on it. Nothing
was said about the panels. I said, My carpenters were
building panels by some other union in some other
state. Later on, we built one hundred thirty-five units in
Pontiac. And panels were twice as large as the ones we
were installing downtown. And we were installing them
with the crane, the same way we were downtown and
there was never a word said to us by any business agent
about unsafety. We never had an accident on the job,
on Pontiac or Keego Harbor lobs.
Harrington's only response was that Perrone was in
violation of the contract. Perrone pleaded with Harrington
to permit the men to go back to work, and to have
meetings to discuss the problem. Harrington indicated
that there was only one solution to the problem, putting
members of Local 337 in the mill.
About this time Perrone Co. was engaged in carpentry
labor operations on six projects in the Detroit area In
addition to the Detroit project, the Respondents in the
latter part of January and early part of February, shut
down Perrone Co.'s operations at jobs in Trenton and
Clinton Townships, and another job in Pontiac, Michigan
These jobs remained shut down until about February 14.
In view of my conclusion regarding the interrelationship
of Perrone Co. and Carpentry Engineering, I need not go
into further details on this aspect of the case.
3. Homes substitutes Willer as the carpentry labor
subcontractor on the Detroit housing project
Shortly after Perrone Co.'s carpentry operations on the
project were shut down, a representative of Smokier called
Carpentry Engineering and inquired whether it would
object if another carpentry labor subcontractor were used
instead of Perrone Co Carpentry Engineering, with John
Perrone concurring, stated that it would not object.
Shortly thereafter William Pitts, vice president in charge
of purchasing for Smokier, asked John Perrone if he
would object if Perrone Co were terminated as labor
subcontractor on the project. Perrone, having obtained a
great deal of business through Smokier over the years,
said that he would not object.
Pitts contacted James Willer, an officer in the Willer
Co., about this time to see if he would be interested in
submitting a bid on installing the wall panels
manufactured by Carpentry Engineering on the Homes
project. At this time Pitts inquired whether Willer Co. had
been shut down for installing panels. Willer replied in the
negative, saying that he had installed panels of his own
make and also those made by Cardinal Industries and by
National Homes without any difficulties.
On January 29, 1969, Homes, through Smokier, its
agent, signed a contract with Willer Co. to furnish the
rough and finish carpentry labor for the project. The
contract, in recognition of Homes' continuing agreement
with Carpentry Engineering , provided that "Labor prices
are based on use of pre-framed wall units."
4. The meeting with the District Council on February
3 to discuss the prefabrication of wall panels, the
District Council's threat to Willer Co. on February 4
On February 3, 1969, before Willer Co. had actually
started work on the project, a meeting was held at the
office of the District Council. Willer and Chris
LOCAL 337, CARPENTERS
Magnussen , the executive secretary of Michigan
Carpentry Contractors' Association of which the Willer
Co. was a member, were present, as were John Perrone
and David Orrell the executive secretary of Carpenter
Contractors' Association of Detroit, of which the Perrone
Co. was a member. In addition to Harrington, the
secretary-treasurer of the Detroit Council, William
Powers, business representative of Local 337, and a
number of other business representatives of Carpenters
Locals representing outside carpenters were also present at
the meeting.
While Perrone sought to find out at this meeting why
the operations of Perrone Co. at the housing project had
been shut down, Harrington refused to consider this
question , asserting that the purpose of the meeting was to
consider the industrywide problem of prefabricated wall
panels. Perrone and Willer advocated the negotiation of a
Millmen's contract providing for the manufacture of
prefabricated wall panels in established shops, like the
existing contract between Local 1452, the Millmen's Local
of the Carpenters, and the Metropolitan Detroit
Millmen's Association, covering general millwork, truss,
and window manufacturers. Willer related his past efforts
in meetings with the District Council to gain the District
Council's approval of the manufacture of wall panels in
permanent shops under a Millmen's agreement
Harrington, so Willer testified, repeatedly stated that
historically carpentry work had been done in the field,
that wall sections had been built in the field, and "that's
the way he wants it to go." Both Willer and Perrone
pointed out that wall panels manufactured by National
Homes of Lafayette, Indiana, and Cardinal Industries of
Columbus, Ohio, were being erected by members of Local
337 and of other outside Carpenters Locals without work
stoppages. The response from the District Council was
that the secondary boycott laws prohibited interference
with the erection of wall panels coming from out of State.
The meeting terminated without any agreement being
reached.
The next day Secretary-Treasurer Harrington called
Willer on the telephone and said that the District Council
would be willing to sign a separate agreement with either
Willer Co. or Perrone Co. providing for the manufacture
of wall panels in an established shop at the outside
carpenters rates. Willer stated his objections to such a
proposal. At the end of the conversation Willer announced
that he had signed a contract with Homes and that the
next morning Willer Co men would be down at the
project, manning the job. Harrington replied, as Willer
testified, that Willer Co. "would be shut down
immediately."
5. The Respondents shut down the Willer Co 's
carpentry operations at the project on February 5; the
Section 10( I) injunction action
On February 5, 1969, the Willer Co. sent three
carpenters to work the project, including a working
foreman, and instructed them to set the floor joists of the
first floor of building 6 at the project. No panels were
involved on this operation. Before the men actually got
started working, Joe Miller, a business representative of
Local 337, approached Carl Strombeck, the Willer Co.'s
working foreman on the job, and told him "This job is
shut down." Strombeck asked Miller the reason for
shutting the job down. Miller refused to answer. After
Strombeck pressed Miller three or four times, Miller
stated that it was because of safety. Asked what was
unsafe, Miller finally stated that it was the wall panels.
811
After an argument between Strombeck and Miller about
the safety of the panel setting operation, Miller stated that
the job was shut down because of the Willer Co.'s
contract violation. In response to Strombeck's request for
an explanation, Miller said that the men in the
lumberyard (apparently the men making the wall panels)
were receiving the Millmen's scale, and that if this were
permitted this could lead to contractors coming out to
project sites, erecting tents, and building wall panels on
the jobsites at the lower Millmen's scale. Strombeck
agreed that this created a problem for the outside
carpenters. With this interchange, Strombeck and the
Willer Co.'s other carpenters left the job. For about 2
weeks thereafter, no Killer Co carpenters attempted to
work on the job.
On February 12 a petition for an injunction against the
Respondents under Section 10(1) of the Act, based upon
the Respondents' alleged unlawful shutdown of the
carpentry labor operations on the project, was filed on
behalf of the Board in the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Michigan, Southern Division,
and an order to show cause was signed that same day by a
District Judge.
6. The Respondents shut down carpentry operations
on the project on February 13, and again briefly on
February 17
The next day, February 13, Perrone Co. sent five
carpenters to the project 3 Joe Miller, the business
representative of Local 337, appeared at the project early
in the morning and, after examining the carpenters' union
cards, told them not to work, that they were to go home.
When Aldrich, Smokler's superintendent, asked for an
explanation for the shutdown, all Miller would say was, as
Aldrich testified, "It was unsafe to handle panels and
breach of contract." The five men instead of leaving the
project immediately gathered in Superintendent Aldrich's
trailer office. About 8.20 a.m David Orrell, the executive
secretary of the Carpenter Contractors' Association of
Detroit, of which Perrone Co. was a member, arrived at
the trailer in response to a telephone call from one of
Perrone Co.'s employees Orrell asked the foreman with
the group who they were working for. When he replied,
"John Perrone," Orrell directed them to "get out there
and pound nails ." The men immediately went out and
started to work. About 10.45 that morning Joe Miller
returned to the project and told the five men, in Aldrich's
words, "that they were union men, they were to do what
he said, to leave and go home." The men immediately left
the project
On February 14 an ex parte temporary 3-day
restraining order was issued by the District Court against
the Respondents based upon the Willer Co.'s charges, and
on February 17 a further temporary restraining order was
entered by the District Court upon the agreement of the
parties and without a hearing. Finally, on February 19 an
order granting a temporary injunction against the
Respondents was entered by the District Court upon
'While the record contains no explanation as to why Perrone Co sent
carpenters to the project after it had been relieved of the carpentry labor
subcontract , I am convinced from my reading of the record as a whole that
the five carpenters sent to the project on this occasion were employees of
Perrone Co James Willer testified that the next time Willer Co sent
carpenters to the project after February 5 was on February 17 The facts
concerning David Orrell's action in connection with this work stoppage,
related in the text above, establish that it was Perrone Co 's carpenters
who were working at the project on this occasion
812 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
consent.
On Friday, February 14, Smokier called Willer Co. and
requested it to man the project the following day Willer
Co. replied that it was too late to notify the men, and that
they would report to work on Monday morning, February
17. Business Representative Joe Miller again shut the job
down. However, about 5 p.m that day District Council
Secretary-Treasurer Harrington called James Willer and
apologized for shutting the job down, said that it had not
been done pursuant to his orders, and explained that the
business representative apparently did not understand the
restraining order. Thereafter, Willer Co. carried on its
carpentry labor operations at the project without any
hindrance from the Respondents.
B. Analysis and Conclusions
Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B), insofar as here relevant,
prohibits a union or its agents from inducing or
encouraging employees of a secondary employer to refuse
to handle products or perform services, and from
threatening, restraining, or coercing secondary employers,
where an object of such conduct is to force or require
secondary employers to cease using or handling the
products of any other manufacturer or to cease doing
business with the primary or disputing employer Thus,
under these provisions there are two elements to a
violation of Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B): (1) an object to
bring about a cessation of business between the primary
and secondary employers or the discontinuance of the
handling of the products of another manufacturer, and (2)
inducement of secondary employees and coercion of
secondary employers to achieve the proscribed objective.
Based on the entire record, I find that an object of the
Respondents' shutting down of Perrone Co.'s and Willer
Co.'s carpentry labor operations at Homes' project was to
cause Homes and Smokier to cease using, and Perrone
Co. and Willer Co. to cease handling or installing,
prefabricated wall panels manufactured by Carpentry
Engineering.
While agents of the Respondents at times mentioned
safety and contract violations as the reasons for causing
the shutdowns, I am convinced that neither were factors
of any significance in the Respondents' decisions to shut
the operations down. Although the Perrone Co., as John
Perrone pointed out to the Respondents' representatives at
the January 23 meeting, had erected many wall panels
manufactured out of State, some of them larger than
those manufactured by Carpentry Engineering for the
Detroit project, nothing was said by the Respondents'
representatives about safety in connection with the
erection of these panels. Only when panels manufactured
locally were involved did the Respondents raise any
question about safety.
The Respondents made no serious effort at the hearing
to make known the contract provisions they were relying
on in making the contract violation claim I find this
claim to be spurious.
As found above, James Willer had repeatedly pressed
the District Council during the summer of 1968 for a
Millmen's agreement covering locally manufactured wall
panels but the District Council refused, insisting that such
panels be manufactured by outside carpenters. Each time
representatives of Perrone Co. or Willer Co. asked the
Respondents' representatives how the shutdowns could be
ended, the subject of the wall panels was ultimately
brought up. Under all the circumstances the inevitable
effect of the shutdowns was to put pressure on the
carpentry contractors to cease handling the panels and to
put pressure on Homes and Smokier to cease using
Carpentry Engineering panels, and to cease doing business
with it.
As found above, the panels manufactured by Carpentry
Engineering were made by members of Local 1452 under
the lower Millmen's wage scale. The Respondents'
underlying goal, it is clear, was to bring about the
employment of members of Local 337 and of other Locals
of outside carpenters for the manufacture of all locally
made prefabricated wall panels. As found above, the wage
scale for outside carpenters under the existing contract
between the District Council and the various employers
associations was higher than the Millmen's wage scale
The Respondents' target in the instant controversy was
Carpentry Engineering, which employed members of
Local 1452, a Millmen's Local. Carpentry Engineering
was the primary employer with whom the Respondents
had the dispute, and Willer Co., Homes, and Smokier
were neutral secondary employers. The Respondents
contend that Perrone Co. is not a neutral to the dispute
because of its relationship to Carpentry Engineering.
Refardless of the disposition of this contention which is
discussed below, it is clear that an object, the primary
object, in fact, of the Respondents' shutting down of
Perrone Co 's and Willer Co.'s operations at the project
was to force or require them to cease handling the wall
panels made by Carpentry Engineering and to force and
require Homes and Smokier to cease using Carpentry
Engineering's wall panels and to cease doing business with
it.
With respect to the second element of the violation of
Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (n)(B), the Respondents' inducement
and encouragement of the employees of Perrone Co and
Willer Co and its coercion of Perrone Co. and Willer Co.
is clearly established in the record. The Respondents'
agents instructed the employees of Perrone Co and Willer
Co to cease work and the employees obeyed and stayed
off the job until an injunction was issued restraining the
Respondents from violating Section 8(b)(4)(i) and ( ii)(B)
of the Act.
Therefore, unless, as contended by the Respondents,
Perrone Co and Carpentry Engineering are to be
regarded as a single person because of the relationship
between the two concerns, the Respondents' violation of
Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (n)(B) with respect to the employees
of both Perrone Co. and Willer Co is clear. In the view
of the Respondents, because of the asserted close
relationship between John Perrone Co. and Carpentry
Engineering and John Perrone's control over both
businessds, any shutdown of Perrone Co 's operations
must be deemed primary rather than secondary action
The General Counsel points out that Perrone Co. and
Carpentry Engineering are separate legal entities and,
relying primarily on Miami Newspaper Pressmen Local
46 v. N.L R B, 322 F 2d 405 (C.A D.C.), and Penello v.
American Federation of Television and Radio Artists,
Washington-Baltimore Local. AFL-CIO, 291 F.Supp. 409
(D Md ), contends that Perrone Co and Carpentry
Engineering should be treated as two separate and distinct
persons.
The record is not clear as to whether the Respondents sought merely to
bring about the employment of members of outside Carpenters Locals in
wall panel manufacturing shops or whether they sought to end all panel
manufacturing operations off the jobsite It is probable that the District
Council, which was the dominant factor in making such a decision, had not
yet formulated its position in this regard at the time of the time of the
dispute
LOCAL 337, CARPENTERS
The facts relating to the relationship between Perrone
Co. and Carpentry Engineering are as follows: About 20
years ago John Perrone established John Perrone Co. as a
sole proprietorship to engage in the carpentry labor
subcontracting business . The office of John Perrone Co. is
at 2055 Haggerty Road, Walled Lake, Michigan, on a
30-acre tract of land which is also occupied by two other
corporations , of each of which John Perrone is the owner
of 60 percent of the stock . One of these is Carpentry
Engineering and the other is Haggerty Lumber Company
The latter operates a wholesale and retail lumberyard All
three businesses have separate offices, maintain separate
books and records, and have separate telephones.
John Perrone had Carpentry Engineering incorporated
as a Michigan corporation in the latter part of 1965 to
engage in the carpentry contracting business and to
engage in general manufacturing work John Perrone gave
two of the Perrone Co.'s key employees -- Ronald
Cotner, who did estimating and office work , and Jack
Parcels, who supervised Perrone Co .' s employees in the
field a total of 40 percent of the stock of Carpentry
Engineering (20 percent each ). Cotner , the secretary of
Carpentry Engineering, spends most of his time
performing estimating and office work for Carpentry
Engineering . Parcels, the president of Carpentry
Engineering , now divides his time about equally between
Perrone Co . and Carpentry Engineering , doing field
supervision work for both businesses . Both Cotner and
Parcels are paid their salaries by Perrone Co. Once a year
they are paid their percentage of the profits in Carpentry
Engineering.
At the time of the events involved in this case John
Perrone owned the building in which Carpentry
Engineering made its prefabricated wall sections. Six
employees, all members of Millmen's Local 1452,
affiliated with the District Council, make these
prefabricated panels. Carpentry Engineering from time to
time has a number of outside carpenters on its payroll
44 in December 1968. All but two of these were
transferred to John Perrone Co.'r payroll in January 1969.
At the time Carpentry Engineering entered into the
contract with Homes in January 1969 to furnish carpentry
labor, material, and hardware for the Detroit project, it
entered into an oral contract with John Perrone providing
that John Perrone Co. would furnish the carpentry labor
on the Detroit project. The only part of this contract
which was in writing was a schedule of unit prices.
John Perrone, by virtue of his position as vice president
and treasurer and majority stockholder in Carpentry
Engineering and by virtue of the fact that his nominees,
Cotner and Parcels, who are dependent upon Perrone Co.
for their salaries, had the other two offices in Carpentry
Engineering, has the power to, and does control, the
activities of Carpentry Engineering. The manner in which
Carpentry Engineering subcontracted the carpentry labor
subcontract of its contract with Homes to Perrone Co.
evidencds John Perrone's exercise of control over
Carpentry Engineering . Under all the circumstances,
particularly in view of John Perrone's "common control"
of both Perrone Co. and Carpentry Engineering, I find
that these two businesses , although separate entities,
should not be regarded as two separate employers or
persons, for the purposes of Section 8(b)(4) of the Act.
It was the absence of control by Knight Newspapers,
Inc., which published the Detroit Free Press, over the
operations of its wholly owned subsidiary, Miami Herald
813
Publishing Company, the publisher of the Miami Herald,
which impelled the Court of Appeals for the District of
Columbia Circuit in the Miami Newspaper Pressmen's
case to reject the Pressmen's contention that Knight
Newspapers, Inc., and the Miami Herald should be
regarded as a single employer (322 F.2d at 408-409). The
Television and Radio Artists decision of the United States
District Court for the District of Maryland is
distinguishable for a similar reason. In this case the two
divisions of the same corporation were involved One was
the News American Division (the newspaper division) of
the Hearst Corporation and the other was the WBAL
Division (the radio division) of the Hearst Corporation.
The two divisions had separate facilities some distance
apart in Baltimore . In the Court's view, although only one
corporate legal entity was involved, the two divisions were
operated as "separate and autonomous" divisions, each
having complete responsibility for its day-to-day
operations, without control by the Hearst Corporation
Accordingly, the Court held that the two divisions were
entitled to be treated as two separate persons and that the
News American Division was entitled to the protection of
Section 8(b)(4) against picketing in furtherance of the
union's primary dispute with the WBAL Division
In the instant case, unlike the situations in the Miami
Newspaper Pressmen's case and the Television and Radio
Artists case, John Perrone had and exercised full control
over the operations of both Perrone Co. and Carpentry
Engineering. In these circumstances it is appropriate that
Perrone Co. and Carpentry Engineering be deemed a
single person and that the Respondents' shutdown of
Perrone Co.'s oterations at the Detroit project be
regarded as primary action against Carpentry
Engineering. I conclude that the Respondents' shutdown
of Perrone Co.'s operations at the Detroit project was not
violative of Section 8(b)(4)(i) and (u)(B) of the Act.
However, contrary to the Respondents' contention, I
find no evidence justifying the conclusion that Willer Co
was an "ally" of the Perrone Co Carpentry
Engineering combination. Willer Co was not cooperating
with Carpentry Engineering in enabling it to fulfill its
contractual obligations to Homes On the contrary,
Willer, by virtue of its contract with Homes, took away
from the Perrone Co. -- Carpentry Engineering
combination carpentry labor work on which the
combination had hoped to make a profit In no sense of
the word can Willer Co. be deemed an ally of Perrone Co
Carpentry Engineering combination. See Shopmen's
Local Union, No 501 (Oliver Whyte Company. Inc ). 120
NLRB 856, 860, and cases therein cited.
Accordingly, Willer Co. was a neutral employer in the
Respondents' dispute with Carpentry Engineering, and the
Respondents' action in shutting down Willer Co.'s
operations at the Detroit project violated Section 8(b)(4)(i)
and (ii)(B) of the Act. So also were Homes and Smokier
neutrals in the Respondents' dispute with Carpentry
Engineering, and the Respondents' shutting down of the
carpentry oterations at Homes' Detroit project constituted
restraint and coercion of Homes and its agent, Smokier,
in violation of Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the Act
The Respondents further violated Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B)
of the Act when they threatened Willer Co. on February 4
that its operations would be shut down immediately if it
attempted to man the Detroit project on the following
day.
814 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Perrone Co., Willer Co., Homes, and Smokier are
persons engaged in an industry affecting commerce within
the meaning of Sections 2(6) and (7) and 8(b)(4) of the
Act.
2. The Respondents , Local 337 and District Council, by
inducing the employees of Willer Co. to refuse in the
course of their employment to perform services at Homes'
housing project with an object of forcing and requiring
Willer Co. to cease handling, and Homes and Smokier to
cease using, the prefabricated wall panels maufactured by
Carpentry Engineering, has engaged in an unfair labor
practice within the meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(i)(B) of the
Act.
3. The Respondents , by the conduct stated in paragraph
2 above and by warning Willer Co. on February 4, 1969,
that its operations would be shut down if it attempted to
man the project on the following day, has threatened,
coerced, and restrained Willer Co., Homes, and Smokier,
thereby engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the Act.
4. The Respondents , Local 337 and District Council, by
inducing the employees of Perrone Co. to refuse in the
course of their employment at Homes' housing project
and elsewhere to perform services, have not engaged in
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8(b)(4)(i) and (ii)(B) of the Act.
5. The aforesaid unfair labor practices affect commerce
within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondents, Local 337 and
District Council engaged in certain unfair labor practices,
my Recommended Order will contain the conventional
cease-and-desist provisions, and will direct the
Respondents to take certain affirmative action designed to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
Upon the foregoing findings and conclusions and the
entire record , and pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Act,
there is hereby issued the following:
RECOMMENDED ORDER
The Respondents , Local 337, United Brotherhood
Carpenters and Joiners of America , AFL-CIO, and
Carpenters ' District Council of Detroit , Wayne, Oakland,
Macomb , St. Clair , Monroe and portions of Sanilac and
Livingston Counties, AFL-CIO, their officers , agents, and
representatives , shall.
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Inducing or encouraging any individual employed by
J. B. Willer Co., Inc ., or by any other person engaged in
commerce or an industry affecting commerce , to engage
in strikes or refusals in the course of their employment to
use, manufacture , process, transport , or otherwise handle
or work on goods and materials , or to perform services.
(b) Threatening , coercing , and restraining J. B. Willer
Co., Inc., Michigan Consolidated Homes, Inc., Bert L
Smokier & Company, or any other person engaged in
commerce or in an industry affecting commerce, where in
either case, an object thereof is to force or require J. B
Willer Co, Inc., Michigan Consolidated Homes, Inc.,
Bert L. Smokier & Company, or any other person, to
cease using, selling, handling, transporting, or otherwise
dealing in the products of, or to cease doing business with,
Carpentry Engineering, Inc
2. Take the following affirmative action found
necessary to effectuate the policies of the Act
(a) Post in conspicuous places in their respective
business offices, meeting halls, and other places where
they customarily post notices to their members and
delegates, signed copies of the attached notice marked
"Appendix "' Copies of said notice, on forms provided by
the Regional Director for Region 7, 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 a period of
60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicous places,
including all places where notices to members and
delegates are customarily posted Reasonable steps shall
be taken by the Respondents to insure that said notices
are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(b) Mail to the Regional Director for Region 7 signed
copies of attached notice for posting by J B Willer Co ,
Inc., Michigan Consolidated Homes, Inc , and Bert L.
Smokier & Company, if they should be willing, on their
respective jobsites where notices to employees are
customarily posted Copies of said notice, to be furnished
by said Regional Director, shall, after being signed by the
Respondents as indicated, be forthwith returned for
disposition by him
(c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 7, in
writing, within 20 days from the receipt of this Decision,
what steps have been taken to comply herewith.,
3. The Respondent Carpenters' District Council of
Detroit, Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, St Clair, Monroe
and portions of Sanilac and Livingston Counties,
AFL-CIO, its officers, agents, and representatives, shall
transmit to its various constituent labor organizations
copies of said notice, with instructions to take such action
with respect thereto as is customary with respect to other
communications by which it advises its constituent labor
organizations of the action or position as to matters with
which its constituent labor organizations would be
concerned
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the allegations of the
consolidated complaint in Cases 7-CC-492(1) and
7-CC-492(2) against Carpenters and Pile Drivers Local
No. 19, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of
America, AFL-CIO, be, and they hereby are, dismissed.
'In the event that this Recommended Order is adopted by the Board, the
words "a Decision and Order" shall be substituted for the words "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 a United States
Court of Appeals, the words "a Decree of the United States Court of
Appeals Enforcing an Order " shall be substituted for the words "a
Decision and Order "
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 7, in writing, within 10 days form the date of this Order, what
steps Respondents have taken to comply herewith "
LOCAL 337, CARPENTERS
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF LOCAL 337 AND OF ALL
OTHER LOCALS AFFILIATED WITH CARPENTERS DISTRICT
COUNCIL OF DETROIT, WAYNE AND OAKLAND COUNTIES
AND VICINITY, AFL-CIO
Pursuant to the Recommended Order of a Trial
Examiner 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 induce or encourage any individual
employed by J. B. Willer Co., Inc., or any other person
engaged in commerce or in industry affecting
commerce, to engage in_ strikes or refusals in the course
of their employment to use, manufacture, process,
transport, or otherwise handle or work on goods and
materials , or to perform services, where an object
thereof is to force or require J. B. Willer Co , Inc,
Michigan Consolidated Homes, Inc., Bert L Smokier
& Company, or any other person, to cease using,
selling, handling, transporting , or otherwise dealing in
the products of, or to cease doing business with,
Carpentry Engineering, Inc.
WE WILL NOT threaten, coerce, or restrain J B.
Willer Co., Inc., Michigan Consolidated Homes, Inc ,
Bert L. Smokier & Company, or any other person
engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting
commerce, where an object thereof is to force or
require aforesaid Employers or any other person to
cease using, selling, handling, transporting. or otherwise
815
dealing in the products of, or to cease doing business
with, Carpentry Engineering, Inc
Dated By
LOCAL 337, UNITED
BROTHERHOOD OF
CARPENTERS AND
JOINERS OF AMERICA,
AFL-CIO
(Labor Organization)
(Representative ) (Title)
Dated By
CARPENTERS DISTRICT
COUNCIL OF
DETROIT, WAYNE AND
OAKLAND COUNTIES
AND VICINITY, AFL-CIO
(Labor Organization)
(Representative) (Title)
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.
If members have any question concerning this notice or
compliance with its provisions, they may communicate
directly with the Board's Regional Office, 500 Book
Building, 1249 Washington Boulevard, Detroit, Michigan
48226, Telephone 313-226-3200