Lumber Workers Local 3171 (Louisiana-Pacific)

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 11, 1985

274 N.L.R.B. 809 (N.L.R.B. 1985)

LUMBER WORKERS LOCAL 3171 (LOUISIANA-PACIFIC)
Lumber Production and Industrial Workers, Local
3171 and Louisiana-Pacific Corporation, Moyie
Springs Operation . Case 19-CB-4884
11 March 1985
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERS
HUNTER AND DENNIS
On 31 October 1984 Administrative Law Judge
George Christensen issued the attached decision.
The Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting
brief. The General Counsel filed a brief in support
of the judge's decision and an answering brief.
The Board has considered the decision and the
record in light of the exceptions and briefs and has
decided to affirm the judge's rulings, findings,' and
conclusions and to adopt the recommended Order
as modified.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board adopts the
recommended Order of the administrative law
judge as modified below and orders that the Re-
spondent, Lumber Production and Industrial Work-
ers, Local 3171, its officers, agents, and representa-
tives, shall take the action set forth in the Order as
modified.
1. Substitute the following for paragraph 1.
"1. Cease and desist from restraining or coercing
employees of Louisiana-Pacific Corporation in the
exercise of their right under Section 7 of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act to refrain from or cease
to support its strike against that employer, by
threatening employees who choose to work during
the strike with bodily harm or damage to their
property, by inflicting bodily harm on them and
damaging their property, by preventing their in-
gress to and egress from that employer's premises,
or by restraining or coercing them in any other
manner."
2. Substitute the attached notice for that of the
administrative law judge.
I In sec II,A of his decision the judge found that the Respondent's
vice president Bell participated in a rock and egg-throwing incident on
25 July 1983 While the evidence shows that Bell was among the ap-
proximately 25 striking employees at the Company's main entrance on 25
July, it does not establish that Bell actually threw rocks or eggs at non-
striking employees' vehicles Thus, in adopting the judge's finding that
the 25 July conduct violated Sec 8(b)(1)(A), we rely on Bell's presence
at the incident and his failure to take any preventive or corrective action
APPENDIX
NOTICE To MEMBERS
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
809
The National Labor Relations Board has found
that we violated the National Labor Relations Act
and has ordered us to post and abide by this notice.
The National Labor Relations Board, after a trial,
held we committed unfair labor practices by threat-
ening employees of Louisiana-Pacific Corporation,
Moyie Springs Operation with bodily harm and
damage to their property for refraining from or
withdrawing from supporting our strike against
that corporation and either continuing or returning
to work for that corporation during our strike
against it , inflicting bodily injury on such employ-
ees, damaging their property and attempting to
prevent and preventing them from coming to and
leaving work at that corporation' s premises, and
ordered us to post this notice advising you in the
future:
WE WILL NOT threaten employees with bodily
injury or property damage if they choose not to
support a strike we have called against Louisiana-
Pacific Corporation, Moyie Springs Operation or
any other employer and work for such employer
during the strike.
WE WILL NOT inflict bodily harm or damage the
property of employees if they choose not to sup-
port a strike we have called against the Louisiana-
Pacific Corporation, Moyie Springs Operation or
any other employer and work for such employer
during the strike.
WE WILL NOT attempt to prevent or prevent em-
ployees who choose not to support a strike we
have called against Louisiana-Pacific Corporation,
Moyie Springs Operation or any other employer
from entering or leaving the premises of such em-
ployer to work during the strike.
WE WILL NOT in any other manner restrain or
coerce employees of Louisiana-Pacific Corporation,
Moyie Springs Operation or any other employer in
the exercise of their rights under Section 7 of the
National Labor Relations Act to refrain or with-
draw from supporting our strike against that em-
ployer and to work during the strike.
LUMBER PRODUCTION AND INDUS-
TRIAL WORKERS , LOCAL 3171
274 NLRB No. 125
810 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
GEORGE CHRISTENSEN, Administrative Law Judge.
On December 13, 1983,1 I conducted a hearing at Spo-
kane, Washington, to try issues raised by an amended
complaint issued on November 23 (and further amended
on November 30) based on a charge filed by Louisiana-
Pacific Corporation (the Company) on August 12 and
amended on August 18.
The amended complaint alleges Lumber Production
and Industrial Workers, Local 3171 (the Union)2 violat-
ed Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the National Labor Relations
Act, by engaging in various allegedly unlawful acts in
the course of conducting a strike and related activities at
the Company's Moyle Springs facility.
The Union denies the actions alleged as violations of
the Act, occurred; if findings are entered they did occur,
that the Union was responsible therefore; and denied by
any such acts, if found, the Union violated the Act.
The issues are whether the acts alleged occurred; if so,
whether the Union was responsible therefor; and if so,
whether the Union thereby violated the Act.
The parties appeared by counsel and were afforded
full opportunity to adduce evidence, examine and cross-
examine witnesses, argue orally, and file briefs. The Gen-
eral Counsel and the Union filed briefs.
Based on my review of the entire record, observation
of the witnesses, perusal of the briefs and research, I
enter the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. JURISDICTION AND LABOR ORGANIZATION
The complaint alleges, the answer admits, and I find at
all pertinent times the Company was an employer en-
gaged in commerce in a business affecting commerce and
the Union was a labor organization within the meaning
of Section 2 of the Act.
II. THE ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Facts
For a substantial period prior to 1983, the Union was
the duly recognized collective-bargaining representative
of the Company's production and maintenance employ-
ees at its Moyie Springs facility and party to a 3-year
agreement expiring July 31, covering their rates of pay,
wages, hours, and working conditions.
On June 27, the Union held a meeting for the purpose
of announcing it was calling its members out on strike
(pursuant to previously voted strike authorization) the
following day, in ostensible3 support of its position con-
i Read 1983 after all further date references omitting the year
2 An affiliate of the Inland Empire District Council of the Internation-
al Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, AFL-CIO, the
Western Council of the International, and the International
9 Ostensible in the sense the Union wanted to join other locals affili-
ated with the District Council, the Western Council, and the Internation-
al in the ongoing dispute between those locals ( including Local 3171) and
the Company over the terms of agreements supplanting their expiring
cerning a pending grievance unresolved in the grievance
procedure of the expiring company-union agreement (the
agreement did not contain a provision for arbitration of
deadlocked grievances as a final step and permitted strike
action to secure favorable resolution thereof), to assign
members to picket shifts and locations, to designate
picket captains, and to designate the latter's picket shifts
and locations. Don Sappington, the Union's president,
Jesse Bell, its (acting) vice president, Burton Baker, its
treasurer and business representative, and members E.
Merrifield, S Health, C. Mueller, D. Voegele, B. Hamil-
ton, D. McDonald, E Stephens, T. Stephens, F. Jones,
and B. Burgess were designated picket captains and as-
signed picket shifts and locations, as were the remaining
members.
The Union established picket lines at the facility the
following morning, manning picket stations at four en-
trances, with striking employees carrying picket signs an-
nouncing Local 3171 was on strike against the Company.
The Union manned its picket lines continuously from
that date through the date of the hearing.
On July 9, the Union held another meeting . The meet-
ing was chaired by Sappington and attended by other of-
ficers of the Union, picket captains, shop stewards, and
other striking employee/members, plus Billy Brothers,
executive secretary of the District Council and Jay Per-
rizo, a representative of the Western Council.4 Sapping-
ton opened the meeting by introducing Perrizo as the
Western Council representative conducting negotiations
with the Company on behalf of the Union and its sister
locals over terms for new agreements. Perrizo gave a
report on the status of negotiations and expressed his
willingness to answer questions. A member asked what
could be done about "gypo" truckers5 hauling lumber
into and out of the facility and nonstriking employees
working there. Perrizo advised him to use his imagina-
tion. Pressed further on what could be done, Perrizo
stated while he could not publicly support violence, in
similar situations in California there had been smashed
windows, cut tires, and fires. Asked about legal conse-
quences, he replied he had been jailed and it had not
hurt him. His comments were received with approval.
The first intimation of trouble reached the Company
on the morning of July 13 when the manager of its
Moyie Springs operations, Chris Paulson, received a tele-
phone call informing him vehicles carrying approximate-
ly 15 of the Company's salaried employees to work from
their homes in nearby Sandpoint, Idaho, were going to
be stopped at the county line by striking employees.
Paulson promptly used his radio communications with
the two vehicles carrying those employees to warn the
1983 agreements, but technically could not do so until the July 31 expira-
tion of its agreement
" The Union admitted at times pertinent Sappington , Bell, Brothers,
and Perrizo occupied the offices set forth above but denied they were
agents of the Union acting on its behalf with respect to the commission
of any of the unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint The Union
also denied F Jones and J Schabel at times pertinent were shop stewards
and agents of the Union acting on its behalf with respect to the commis-
sion of any of the unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint
5 Independent, usually owner-operator truckers, unrepresented by any
labor organization
LUMBER WORKERS LOCAL 3171 (LOUISIANA-PACIFIC) 811
occupants to expect trouble and telephoned the state
police to request a police escort for the two vehicles.
Tuning in a second (citizen band) radio in his possession,
Paulson heard radioed statements such as "hit the scabs,"
"run them off the road," etc Paulson recognized one of
the voices by its distinctive accent as that of C. Mueller,
a striking employee and union picket captain. Paulson
also received radio reports from employees in the two
vehicles that a caravan of vehicles was attempting to
block their progress toward the facility and harassing
them as they were guided through the attempted block-
ade by a police escort. When the two vehicles and their
police escort arrived at the facility, so did numerous ve-
hicles containing striking employees. The striking em-
ployees, including Union President Sappington, Vice
President Bell, and Picket Captains Burgess, Hamilton,
McDonald, and Mueller left their vehicles at the main
entrance to the facility, as the two vehicles carrying the
salaried employees passed through the entrance, parked,
and their occupants alighted, the striking employees
shouted, "We are going to get you," "We will make sure
you pay," "You are a dirty scab," and the like. Sapping-
ton, Bell , Burgess, Hamilton, McDonald, and Mueller
made no effort to control the words and conduct of the
striking employees
A series of incidents involving threatened and actual
violence occurred thereafter
Mike Ashby, a 7-year employee of the Company and a
union member , joined and participated in the strike be-
tween June 27 and July 21, when he returned to work.
On the morning of July 22, he and another employee
who also decided to return to work planned to travel to-
gether from their homes to the facility in the latter's ve-
hicle When his companion arrived at Ashby's home, he
advised Ashby another vehicle had been following him
and was parked down the road. Anticipating trouble,
Ashby telephoned the Company and requested an escort.
The Company agreed and dispatched two vehicles, one
containing two managerial employees and the other two
company security guards, with instructions to escort
Ashby and his companion to the facility When the two
company vehicles arrived at the Ashby home, they
placed the vehicle containing Ashby and his companion
between their vehicles and proceeded towards the facili-
ty. A short distance down the road from Ashby's home,
the occupants of the three vehicles saw Union Vice
President Bell standing next to a parked vehicle with
some eggs , which he threw at the vehicle carrying
Ashby and his companion, scoring one hit. As the three-
vehicle convoy passed Bell, a group of striking employ-
ees ran out of the brush behind Bell's vehicle and shout-
ed epithets at the occupants of the three vehicles
On July 25 about 4 p.m., while approximately 25 strik-
ing employees, including Union Vice President Bell,
were picketing the main entrance of the facility as vehi-
cles containing nonstriking employees passed through
that entrance at the end of the day shift, the striking
employees/pickets threw rocks and eggs at the passing
vehicles As the vehicles cleared the entrance and pro-
ceeded down the adjacent highway, other striking em-
ployees, lined up alongside the highway, continued to
bombard the nonstriking employees' vehicles with rocks
and eggs until they cleared the area, causing bodily
injury and property damage to nonstriking employees
and their vehicles Bell not only made no effort to con-
trol the conduct of the striking employees, he participat-
ed therein
On August 1 about 7 a in., approximately 25 striking
employees, including Union President Sappington, at-
tempted to prevent nonstriking employees from entering
the facility by mass picketing the entrance , as nonstriking
employees attempted to enter in their vehicles, and bom-
barded vehicles containing nonstriking employees with
rocks as they proceeded through the entrance After
police arrived, the rock throwing stopped, but resumed
when the police left, with striking employees/pickets
throwing rocks at any person or vehicle entering or leav-
ing the facility In the course of the rock throwing,
Union Picket Captain D McDonald threw a rock which
struck contractor Ron Petty as Petty left the facility.
Sappington and McDonald made no effort to control the
conduct of the striking employees/pickets but rather par-
ticipated therein.
About 10 a in. on August 2, another incident involving
nonstriking employee Ashby occurred Ashby was stand-
ing outside a shop building at the facility when he heard
a missile pass near his head and strike the side of the
building, denting the side of the building. The only per-
sons in the area facing the side of the building were two
striking employees/pickets, Terry Johnson and Ron
Starr, standing at one of the Union's picket stations. The
missile was a three-fourth-inch lug nut of the type nor-
mally used on auto wheels, judging from the size of the
dent and the distance between the edge of the Compa-
ny's property to the side of the building, the nut prob-
ably was launched from a slingshot with a frame fitting
over the wrist and equipped with heavy elastic, to cover
the distance involved and have the velocity to dent the
side of the building
On August 5 about 5.45 p.m., nonstriking employees
Tom Clarmont and Dick Funkhauser arrived at the facil-
ity in Clarmont's pickup truck to commence work Clay-
mont parked the truck in a parking lot just outside the
facility and adjacent to one of the Union's picket sta-
tions, where several striking employees/pickets were
standing, including Union President Sappington. Non-
striking employees Ashby and David Thomas observed
the arrival of Clarmont and Funkhauser and, as the two
left the truck and walked onto company property, Ashby
advised Clarmont to move his truck onto company prop-
erty. Clarmont agreed and he and Funkhauser went back
to the truck and drove it onto company property. As the
vehicle passed the picket station, Sappington picked up a
large rock and threw it against the door of the vehicle.
About 1 a.m. on August 6, while company security
guard Gloria Bowers and another guard were patrolling
the facility with a guard dog, they saw two autos pro-
ceed down a road running near a large storage shed on
company property and stop. The two guards tried to
conceal themselves and the dog as a man alighted from
one of the vehicles and approached the shed. As the man
neared the shed, he fired a flare from a flare gun in the
direction of the guards and the dog, which struck the
812 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
shed about 6 feet above Bowers' head. Bowers ap-
proached him with the dog and stated he was trespassing
on company property. The man cursed her, threatened
to blow her and the dog's head off, retreated to his auto,
and left. Bowers noted the license number of his vehicle
and checked to see to whom it was issued. It was issued
to Union Vice President Bell. Bowers later saw the same
man on the picket line and asked company officials famil-
iar with the identity of the Company's striking employ-
ees who he was. They identified him as Union Vice
President Bell
On August 7 about 7 p.m., Bowers noticed a large
bark and log pile in the north yard of the facility was on
fire and notified Paulson and the local sheriff. Paulson,
the sheriff, and the Moyie Springs fire department went
to the scene and spent approximately 1 hour in putting
out the fire. During the time they were fighting the
blaze, Union Vice President Bell and other striking em-
ployees emerged from the Moyie Clubs and watched the
action.
On August 8, Bowers and another guard were patrol-
ling the facility in a pickup truck at approximately 10
p.m. In the course of their patrol, they parked the vehi-
cle behind a boiler, alongside railroad tracks running
through the facility. At that time, Union Vice President
Bell was on the other side of the railroad tracks from the
guards' location holding a cord-type slingshot, with a
cord about 2-1/2 feet long, as another man placed a
glowing object in the pouch of the sling. Bell launched
the object toward the guards; it hit the ground about 50
feet from them and exploded. Bell and his companion
were standing at or near a picket station normally
manned by striking employees/pickets. Several striking
employees/pickets were at the picket station, including
Union Picket Captain McDonald. Shortly after Bell
launched his missile toward the guards, one of the strik-
ing employees/pickets at the picket station threw a
molotov cocktail' toward a railroad car loading wood
chips on the railroad spur line adjacent to the main track;
it glanced off the car, failing to ignite the car's contents.
Union Vice President Bell was at the picket station at
the time the striking employees/picket threw the device
at the car and made no effort to stop it or to remonstrate
with the thrower. Following this incident, the striking
employee/pickets began lighting and throwing what ap-
peared to be fireworks in the vicinity.
During the afternoon of August 10, the local court (on
technical grounds) quashed a previously issued injunction
restraining the Union, its officers, representatives, agents,
and members from certain picketing and related activi-
ties.8
The parties received notice of the quashing of the in-
junction prior to the end of the day shift on August 10.
When the shift ended (at approximately 4 p.m.) and non-
striking employees began to leave the facility in their ve-
hicles, about 15 striking employees/pickets, including
Union President Sappington and Union Vice President
Bell, attempted to block the nonstriking employees from
leaving the facility by mass picketing across the en-
trance.
All the picket stations were more heavily manned than
usual following the departure of the nonstriking day-shift
employees, and a large number of striking employees
gathered in the area opposite the Company's property
Several carried bows, crossbows, and guns Security
guard Bowers went off duty in the early evening and
went to the security building to sleep
She was awakened by the sound of rocks hitting build-
ings within the facility and loud explosions. As she
emerged from the security building, she saw a striking
employee/picket throw a burning object into a railroad
car partially loaded with wood chips, starting a fire. She
telephoned Paulson and the local sheriff. Soon Paulson
and some management personnel staying at his home
(within the facility), the sheriff, and the Moyie Springs
Fire Department arrived. As company personnel and the
Moyie Springs firefighters worked to put out the blaze,
they and company property were hit by rocks, bottles,
and other missiles thrown by striking employees massed
opposite the burning carload of wood chips. The objects
inflicted both bodily injury and property damage. Union
Vice President Bell was at the scene throughout and
made no effort either to stop the harassment of the fire-
fighters or to remonstrate with those throwing objects at
them. Rocks and other objects continued to strike build-
ings on company property thereafter; by the following
morning, all the windows of the company office building
facing the railroad tracks were smashed.
The rock throwing and damage continued the next
day (August 11). When nonstriking employees attempted
to report to work that morning, striking employees/-
pickets, including Union President Sappington and Vice
President Bell, were out in force and, as nonstriking em-
ployees sought entrance to the facility in their vehicles,
the striking employees/pickets, including Sappington and
Union Steward Jeff Schabel,9 threw rocks at the non-
strikers and their vehicles, inflicting both bodily injury
and property damage.
Only a few incidents occurred after the temporary re-
straining order was re-issued on August 15.
On August 17, when nonstriking employee Ron King
came out of his house to drive to work, he found some-
time during the previous night an unknown person paint-
ed, "I am a scab" in large letters on the side of his truck;
on September 29, in the presence of District Council Ex-
ecutive Secretary Brothers, Union Vice President Bell
parked his auto so it partially blocked the road utilized
by the operator of the Company's log loader to move
logs across the highway from the main grounds of the
facility to a storage area on the other side of the high-
way, so the operator could not follow the normal prac-
6 The Moyie Club is a tavern the striking employees frequented, it was
also utilized by the Union as a meeting hall It is located directly opposite
the north yard
r An incendiary device
8 The injunction was reinstated on August 15 and replaced by a pre-
liminary injunction on November 30
9 I credit Paulson's testimony the Union designated Schabel one of its
shop stewards prior to commencement of the strike, he recognized Scha-
bel as a union shop steward and negotiated with Schabel in attempting to
adjust grievances, Schabel acting on behalf of unit employees, brought to
his attention, and he has never been advised by the Union of any change
in Schabel's status as its shop steward
LUMBER WORKERS LOCAL 3171 (LOUISIANA-PACIFIC) 813
tice of carrying the logs alongside the loader (to better
balance the load) and had to elevate the log carry to a
high position to clear Bell's auto while proceeding past
it; and on September 30, striking employee/Union Picket
Captain F Jones, in the presence of Brothers, picked up
and threw a rock at nonstriking employee Ashby while
he was operating the log loader (the rock missed Ashby,
glancing off the loader)
The factual findings set out above are based on docu-
ments, stipulations and the testimony of company offi-
cials Chris Paulson, Robert Blanford, and Joseph Tolar,
security guards Gloria Bowers and Thomas McClaren,
and company employees/union members Mike Ashby,
James Collier, and Ronald King, who impressed me as
sincere and truthful, the Union made no attempt to refute
their testimony other than by testimony of District
Council Executive Secretary Brothers limited to denying
on September 20 he was aware Bell's parked vehicle was
blocking the log loader, denying on September 30 he
was aware Jones threw a rock at Ashby while Ashby
was operating the loader and nodded his approval of
Jones' conduct, and testimony the officers of the Union
at times counseled against violence. While I credit Broth-
ers' testimony he was unaware Bell's parked car impeded
the operation of the loader, I do not credit his testimony
he did not see and condone Jones' September 30 action,
rather crediting the contrary testimony of Paulson and
Ashby.
B Analysis and Conclusions
1. Commission of the acts
I have entered factual findings.
1. On June 26, the Union authorized and on June 27
commenced strike and picketing activities at the facility
in pursuit of economic objectives, and continued those
activities through (and beyond) December 13
2. On July 9, a union negotiator conducting contract
negotiations with the Company on behalf of the Union
provoked and encouraged striking company employees/-
union members to resort to violence to inhibit the Com-
pany's continued operation of the facility during the
strike.
3 On July 13, a group of striking employees (including
the union president, vice president, and a number of its
picket captains) impeded nonstriking employees of the
Company from reporting for work and threatened them
with bodily harm for reporting to work.
4 On July 22, the union vice president threw eggs at a
vehicle containing two nonstriking employees of the
Company as they proceeded under company escort to
report for work at the facility, scoring one hit.
5. On July 25, a group of striking employees (including
the union vice president) picketing the facility threw
rocks and eggs at vehicles and their occupants (nonstrik-
ing employees) as the latter left the facility, other strik-
ing employees continued to throw eggs and rocks at
those vehicles and their occupants as they cleared the fa-
cility and proceeded down the highway; and the rock
throwing inflicted bodily injury and property damage
6. On August 1, a group of striking employees/pickets
(including a union picket captain) impeded vehicles oc-
cupied by nonstriking employees from entering the facili-
ty by mass picketing, threw rocks at the vehicles and
their occupants and at a contractor who did business
with the Company as they left the facility; and inflicted
bodily injury and property damage
7. On August 2, a missile, which appeared to have
been launched from a location where two striking em-
ployees/pickets were standing , narrowly missed a non-
striking employee and damaged company property
8 On August 5, the union president, in the presence of
a group of striking employees/pickets at a picket station
adjacent to company property, threw a rock which
struck the door of a vehicle being driven into the facility
by a nonstriking employee, inflicting property damage.
9. On August 6, the union vice president fired a flare
which struck a shed on company property about 6 feet
above the head of a company security guard and cursed
and threatened the guard when she told him he was tres-
passing.
10 On August 7, the union vice president and other
striking employees were present, stood by and watched
while company and public personnel put out a fire of un-
known origin which destroyed company property
11. On August 8, in the presence of a union strike cap-
tain and several striking employees/pickets, the union
vice president launched a burning object by slingshot
from the vicinity of a union picket station adjacent to
company property which landed and exploded on com-
pany property, about 50 feet from two company security
guards, on the same date, at the same location, in the
presence of the union vice president, a union picket cap-
tain , and several striking employees/pickets, one of the
striking employees/pickets threw an incendiary device at
a railroad car being loaded with wood chips on a spur
line on company property (which glanced off the car,
failing to ignite its contents); and on the same date, at the
same location , and with the same persons present, a
number of the striking employees/pickets lit and ex-
ploded what appeared to be firecrackers in the general
area
12 On August 10, after news a previously issued in-
junction restraining certain conduct by the striking em-
ployees and the Union had been quashed reached the
strikers and the Union, a group of striking employees/-
pickets, including the union president and vice president,
impeded vehicles occupied by nonstriking employees
from leaving the facility by mass picketing across the en-
trance, following the departure of the nonstrikers, an ad-
ditional number of striking employees congregated oppo-
site the facility, carrying bows, crossbows and guns, and
through the balance of the evening and into the next
morning, company buildings within the facility were
bombarded with rocks, missiles, and other objects, result-
ing in extensive property damage, including the smashing
of all of the windows of the office building facing the
area where the strikers massed. As evening fell a striker,
in the presence of other strikers, threw a burning object
into a railroad car loading wood chips on company prop-
erty, igniting the chips; while company and public per-
sonnel battled the blaze, the strikers, in the presence of
the union vice president, showered them with rocks, bot-
814 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ties and other objects, inflicting bodily injury and prop-
erty damage and impeding their efforts, without interces-
sion by the union vice president
13. On the following morning (August 11), a group of
strikers, which included the union president, its vice
president, and a union shop steward, gathered at the fa-
cility prior to the start of the day shift; impeded the
entry of vehicles occupied by nonstrikers as they arrived
for work; threw rocks at the vehicles and their occu-
pants as they went through, and inflicted bodily injury
and property damage.
14. While a vehicle used by a nonstriking employee
was parked at his home the night of August 16-17, an
unknown person painted "I am a scab" in large letters on
the vehicle.
15. On September 29, the log loader utilized by the
Company to move logs across the highway from one
part of the facility to another was prevented from
making its normal carry alongside the vehicle (to better
balance the load) due to the union vice president's park-
ing of his auto alongside the highway so as to obstruct
part of the roadway the loader used in traveling back
and forth across the highway
16. On September 30, in the presence of an official of
the District Council who normally represented the
Union in processing grievances at one of the higher steps
of the grievance procedure under the company-union
agreement, a union picket captain threw a rock at a non-
striking employee operating the Company's log loader
(which struck the loader and glanced off without hitting
its operator).
In essence, the above findings establish all the acts al-
leged in the complaint occurred.
2 Did such acts violate the Act?
The Board consistently has ruled threatening employ-
ees10 with bodily harm for exercising their Section 7
right to refrain from participating in a strike (or with-
drawing therefrom) is violative of Section 8(b)(1)(A) of
the Act."
10 Including salaried and supervisory employees , so long as employees
within the unit represented by the striking union hear the threats , without
regard to whether such employees are nonstrikers (since striking employ-
ees hearing such threats might be intimidated from abandoning the strike
and returning to work)
11 Machinists Lodge 758 (Menasco), 267 NLRB 1147 (1983), Longshore-
men Locals 1242, 1291 & 1332 (Trailer Marine), 266 NLRB 1204 (1983),
Laborers Local 383 (Carter-Glogau), 260 NLRB 1340 (1982), Machinists
Lodge 34 (Wolf Machine), 254 NLRB 282 (1981), Teamsters Local 959
(Frontier Transport), 248 NLRB 743 (1980), Iron Workers Local 455 (Stok-
vis), 243 NLRB 340 (1979), Plastic Workers Local 18 (Grede Plastics), 235
NLRB 363 (1978), Mine Workers District 11 (S & S Coal), 235 NLRB 757
(1978), Teamsters Local 810 (Russell Plastics), 235 NLRB 40 (1978), Meat-
cutters Local 222 (Iowa Beef), 233 NLRB 839 (1977), Union de Operadores
(Puerto Rican Cement), 231 NLRB 171 (1977), Roofers Local 30 (Kitson
Bros), 228 NLRB 652 (1977), Roofers Local 30 (Associated Builders), 227
NLRB 1444 (1977), Service Employees District 1199 (Southport Manor),
227 NLRB 1732 (1977), Meatcutters Local 248 (Milwaukee Meatpacking
Assn), 222 NLRB 1023 (1976), Teamsters Local 695 (Yellow Cab), 221
NLRB 647 (1975), Union de Trabajadores (Jacobs Construction), 219
NLRB 405, 414, 429, and 862 (1975), Laborers Local 245 (Apex Contract-
ing), 219 NLRB 142 (1975), Service Employees Local 254 (Massachusetts
Institute), 218 NLRB 1399, enfd 535 F 2d 1335 (5th Cir 1976), Service
Employees Local 50 (Our Lady), 208 NLRB 117 (1974), Oilworkers Local
1-591 (Snelson), 208 NLRB 296 (1974), Teamsters Local 918 (Tale-Lord
Mfg.), 206 NLRB 382 (1973), Boilermakers Local 696 (Kargard), 196
Similarly, inflicting bodily harm on, or damaging the
property of, such employees for exercising the same
right is violative of the Act, 12 as is attempting to pre-
vent, or preventing such employees from going to and
from work, by mass picketing, etc 13
All the actions set out in 1 through 16, above, fell in
one of the three categories set out above, i.e., each went
beyond the limits established by Congress on actions a
union may take to accomplish its strike objectives-
peaceful picketing, nonthreatening oral persuasion-and
were acts which interfered with, restrained, and coerced
the exercise of their rights under Section 7 of the Act.
3 Union responsibility therefor
The only remaining question is whether the Union is
responsible.
Section 2(13) of the Act does not require proof a prin-
cipal has authorized or ratified an action by his agent for
his benefit before the principal may be held responsible
for that action, only requiring a showing the agent was
acting within the general scope of his employment or ap-
parent authority. Reasoning that an officer or representa-
tive of a striking union is acting within the scope of his
employment or apparent authority when he seeks to ac-
complish his union's strike objective-halting the struck
employer's operations so the employer will yield to his
union's demands for settling the strike-when that officer
or representative threatens a nonstriking employee with
bodily harm and/or property damage if they perform
work for the struck employer during the strike, when
that officer or representative inflicts bodily injury and/or
property damage on nonstriking employees of that em-
ployer for attempting to work or working for the struck
employer during the strike, and when that officer or rep-
resentative attempts to impede or impedes the access of
nonstriking employees to the struck employer's premises
in an effort to prevent their working for the struck em-
ployer during the strike, the Board has held the striking
union responsible for those actions The Board has ruled
in similar fashion concerning action by striking employ-
ees/members designated by a striking union to carry on
strike and picketing activities on its behalf, reasoning
those persons by such designation became agents of the
Union acting within the scope of their apparent authority
(particularly when they were following a lead or pattern
NLRB 645 (1972), Mine Workers District 20 (Harbert), 192 NLRB 565
(1971), Machinists (General Electric), 189 NLRB 50 (1971), Teamsters
Local 327 (Coca-Cola), 184 NLRB 84 (1970), Teamsters Local 695 (Tony
Pellitterri), 174 NLRB 753 (1969), Teamsters Local 783 (Coca-Cola), 160
NLRB 1776 (1966), Teamsters Local 115 (E J Lavino), 157 NLRB 1637
(1966), Electrical Workers Local 905 (Sperry Rubber), 134 NLRB 1713
(1961), Woodworkers Locals S-246 & (W T Smith Lumber), 116 NLRB
507 (1956), enfd 243 F 2d 745 (5th Cir 1957), Longshoremen Local 6
(Sunset Line), 79 NLRB 1487 (1948)
' See the cases cited in the foregoing footnote, plus Mine Workers
District 5 v Kerry Coal Co, 637 F 2d 957 (3d Cir 1981), Laborers Local
721 (Crouse Nuclear Energy), 256 NLRB 195 (1981), Service Employees
District 1199 (Frances Schervier Hospital), 245 NLRB 800 (1979), Team-
sters Local 298 (Schumaher El.), 236 NLRB 428 (1978), Service Employees
Local 250 (Broadway Hospital), 244 NLRB 340 (1979), and Teamsters
Local 563 (Northern Contractors Supply), 183 NLRB 1023 (1970)
Is See the cases cited in the preceding two footnotes, plus Metal Pol-
ishers Local 67 (Alto-Cad Nickel Plating), 200 NLRB 335 (1972)
LUMBER WORKERS LOCAL 3171 (LOUISIANA-PACIFIC) 815
established by a union officer or representative, an offi-
cer or representative participated therein, or an officer or
representative was present and took no preventive or pu-
nitive action )14
With respect to the actions numbered 3-6, 8, 11-13,
and 16 under this heading, each such action was commit-
ted by an officer, representative, or agent of the Union
following a lead or pattern established by a union officer
or representative, or a union officer or representative
participated therein, or a union officer or representative
was present and took no preventive or punitive action
I therefore find by such actions the Union violated
Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act.15
As to the actions, numbers 7, 10, and 14 under this
heading, the identity of the person or persons who
launched the missile at the nonstriker (7), set the fire
(10), and painted the nonstriker's vehicle (14) was not es-
tablished, I therefore find those actions may not be at-
tributed to the Union and will recommend dismissal of
those portions of the complaint alleging by those actions
the Union violated the Act.16
With respect to the flare-launching incident (9), the in-
cident was not witnessed by any striking or nonstriking
employee; therefore, there were no employees present
whose Section 7 rights might be affected. I therefore
shall recommend dismissal of those portions of the com-
plaint alleging by that action the Union violated Section
8(b)(1)(A) of the Act
With respect to the parking incident (15), in the ab-
sence of proof Bell parked his auto in order to block the
loader, I find by such parking the Union did not violate
the Act 17
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1 At all pertinent times the Company was an employ-
er engaged in commerce in a business affecting com-
merce and the Union was a labor organization within the
meaning of Section 2 of the Act
2. At pertinent times Jay Perrizo, Billy Brothers, Don
Sappington, and Jesse Bell, the Union's picket captains,
shop stewards, and members/pickets were agents of the
Union acting on its behalf within the meaning of Section
2 of the Act.
3 Between July 13 and September 30, 1983, in the
course of strike and picketing activities it conducted at
and in the vicinity of the Company's Moyie Springs op-
erations, the Union violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the
Act by:
(a) Threatening employees of the Company with
bodily harm and/or property damage for working for
the Company during the strike.
(b) Inflicting bodily harm to employees of the Compa-
ny and damage to their property for working for the
Company during the strike.
14 See the cases cited in fns 11, 12, and 13
15 See the cases cited in fns 11, 12, and 13
16 Plastic Workers Local 18 (Grede Plastics), ibid , Meatcutters Local 248
(Milwaukee Independent Meatpackers Assn ), ibid , Boilermakers Local 696
(Kargard), ibid, Woodworkers Locals S-246 & S-249 (W T. Smith
Lumber), ibid
17 General Iron Corp, 224 NLRB 1180 1976
(c) Attempting to impede and impeding employees of
the Company from reporting for their work shifts at the
Company's facility and from leaving the facility at the
end of their work shifts
4 The Union did not otherwise violate the Act
5 The unfair labor practices dust set forth affected and
affect commerce, as defined in Section 2 of the Act.
THE REMEDY
Having found the Union committed various unfair
labor practices , I recommend it be directed to cease and
desist therefrom and take affirmative action designed to
effectuate the purposes of the Act.
On these findings of fact and conclusions of law and
on the entire record, I issue the following recommend-
ed18
ORDER
The Respondent, Lumber Production and Industrial
Workers, Local 3171, its officers, agents, and representa-
tives, shall
I Cease and desist from interfering with, restraining,
or coercing employees of Louisiana-Pacific Corporation
in the exercise of their right under Section 7 of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act, to refrain from or cease to
support its strike against that employer by threatening
employees who choose to work during the strike with
bodily harm or damage to their property, by inflicting
bodily harm to them and damaging their property, by
preventing their ingress to and egress from that employ-
er's premises, or by in any other manner interfering with,
restraining, or coercing them.
2. Take the following action designed to effectuate the
purposes of the Act
(a) Post at its meeting halls and offices copies of the
attached notice marked "Appendix." 19 Copies of the
notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for
Region 19, after being signed by the Respondent's au-
thorized representative, shall be posted by the Respond-
ent immediately upon receipt and maintained for 60 con-
secutive days in conspicuous places including all places
where notices to members are customarily posted. Rea-
sonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to ensure
that the notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by
any other material
(b) Mail or deliver to the Regional Director for
Region 19, signed copies of the Appendix for forwarding
to Louisiana-Pacific Corporation for posting, if that em-
ployer agrees, upon all bulletin boards and other places
where notices to employees are customarily posted.
18 If no exceptions are filed as provided by Sec 102 46 of the Board's
Rules and Regulations, the findings, conclusions, and recommended
Order shall, as provided in Sec 102 48 of the Rules, be adopted by the
Board and all objections to them shall be deemed waived for all pur-
poses
19 If 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 Na-
tional Labor Relations Board" shall read "Posted Pursuant to a Judgment
of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the Nation-
al Labor Relations Board
816 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 19 within
20 days from the date of this Order what steps Local
3171 has taken to comply.