Manufacturing Woodworkers Association of Greater New York, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 7, 1969

179 N.L.R.B. 538 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

538 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Manufacturing Woodworkers Association of Greater
New York , Inc. and District Council No. 9, of
New York City of the Brotherhood of Painters,
Decorators and Paperhangers of America,
AFL-CIO , Petitioner. Case 2-UC-27
November 7, 1969
DECISION AND ORDER DENYING
PETITION TO CLARIFY UNIT
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND ZAGORIA
Upon a petition duly filed by the Petitioner under
Section 9(b) of the National Labor Relations Act,
as amended, a hearing was held on various dates
between November 21, 1968, and June 18, 1969,
before Haywood E. Banks, a Hearing Officer of the
National Labor Relations Board. On July 1, 1969,
the Acting Regional Director for Region 2 issued an
order transferring this case to the Board. Thereafter
the Employer, the Petitioner, and District Council
of New York City and Vicinity of the United
Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America,
AFL-CIO, hereinafter called the Intervenor, filed
timely briefs with the Board.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel.
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error. The rulings are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, including the
b.iefs filed by the parties, the Board finds:'
1. The Employer, a multiemployer bargaining
association (hereinafter called the Association)
comprised of 45 wood products manufacturers who
do business in the Greater New York metropolitan
area, is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act, and it will effectuate the purposes of the
Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The Petitioner and the Intervenor are labor
organizations within the meaning of the Act.
3. Members of the Employer Association are
engaged in the manufacturing of paneling,
architectural woodwork, show and display cases,
cabinets, desks and related products. Each of the
member-employers operates a shop where it engages
in all phases of the manufacturing process from the
cutting and assembling of raw materials to finishing
and wiring. Some of the employer-members also
perform installation work on the premises of the
purchasers of their products.
The Intervenor contends that the petition should be dismissed for failure
to conform to certain provisions in the Board's Rules and Regulations The
record reveals that the Intervenor received sufficient notice of the matters
involved in this case, and in the absence of any showing of prejudice its
contention is hereby denied
For many years the Petitioner represented "wood
finishers" employed in the shops of 21 of the 45
member-employers who comprise the Association.
Since at least 1950 the Petitioner and the
Association have been parties to a series of
collective-bargaining agreements covering the "wood
finishers", the most recent of which expired in 1967.
Also for many years the Association and the
Intervenor have been parties to a series of
collective-bargaining agreements applicable to
employees in various classifications and "all other
employees doing production work" in the shops of
all 45 member-employers. The record reflects that
although the unit represented by the Intervenor did
include some employees who engaged at least in
part in wood finishing processes, the classification of
"wood finishers" was not named in any of the
Intervenor's contracts through 1967.
After the expiration of their 1964-67 bargaining
agreement the Petitioner and the Association
conducted numerous bargaining sessions, but were
unable to reach agreement on certain matters
including, among others, a provision on union
security. A strike ensued, was subsequently settled,
and the parties resumed negotiations, but no
agreement has ever been reached. In the interim, on
some undetermined date following the expiration of
their 1964-67 bargaining agreement, the Association
and the Intervenor entered into a new agreement for
the term 1967-70, which for the first time included
the classification of "wood finishers."
On October 31, 1968, the Petitioner filed the
instant petition asking the Board to clarify the
bargaining unit recognized by the Association under
the terms of the Intervenor's 1967-70 contract.
Insofar as we understand the Petitioner's contention,
it argues that on the basis of greater skills and
bargaining history the "wood finishers" employed in
21 of the member-employers' shops are
inappropriately included in the unit represented by
the Intervenor and should, accordingly, be removed
from that unit and placed in a unit coextensive with
the bargaining unit previously represented by the
Petitioner. The Employer Association and the
Intervenor argue that the petition should be
dismissed relying, inter alia , on their current
contract, and arguing that a question concerning
representation exists which cannot be resolved in a
unit clarification proceeding.
Upon the foregoing facts, and considering the
record as a whole, it is clear that the Petitioner's
unit clarification action is inappropriate to resolve
the dispute over representation of "wood finishers"
employed in 21 shops of employer-members of the
Association. The Petitioner is not currently
recognized by any of the employer-members, and
insofar as the record reflects has no contractual
right to represent any of their employees On the
contrary, insofar as the record reflects and the
Board may determine in this proceeding, the
Intervenor is the duly recognized and contractual
179 NLRB No. 85
MANUFACTURING WOODWORKERS ASSOCIATION 539
representative of the "wood finishers," and the proceeding now before us.2 Accordingly, we shall
instant petition raises a question concerning dismiss the petition.
representation which cannot be resolved in the
'Our Decision herein is not to be construed as determinative in any other
proceeding involving the conflict between the Petitioner and other parties
over the right to represent the "wood finishers ," and we intimate no
findings or conclusions on the unfair labor practice charges currently
pending before the Regional Director for Region 2
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the Petition be, and it
hereby is, dismissed.