The Metallic Lathers Union , Local 46

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 11, 1966

156 N.L.R.B. 749 (N.L.R.B. 1966)

THE METALLIC LATHERS UNION, LOCAL 46 749
WE WILL NOT in any other manner interfere with, restrain , or coerce our
employees in the exercise of their rights under Section 7 of the Act.
COLONY FURNITURE Co.,
Employer.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(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 employees have any question concerning this notice or compliance with its pro-
visions, they may communicate directly with the Board 's Regional Office, 746 Federal
Office Building, 167 North Main Street , Memphis, Tennessee , Telephone No.
534-3161.
'The Metallic Lathers Union of New York and Vicinity, Local 46
of The Wood , Wire & Metal Lathers International Union,
AFL-CIO and Slattery Contracting Co., Inc.
'The Metallic Lathers Union of New York and Vicinity , Local 46
of The Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International Union,
AFL-CIO and George A . Fuller Company. Cases Nos. 2-CD-
928 and 2-CD-329. January 11, 1966
DECISION AND ORDER QUASHING
NOTICE OF HEARING
This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, following charges filed on March 5, 1965,
by Slattery Contracting Co., Inc., herein called Slattery, and on
March 16, 1965, by George A. Fuller Company, herein called Fuller,
alleging violations of Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (D) by Respond-
ent Local 46, Wood, Wire & Metal Lather International Union, AFL-
CIO, herein called Local 46. On April 8, 1965, the Regional Director
for Region 2 consolidated these cases and thereafter a duly scheduled
hearing was held before Hearing Officer Alan H. Randall, on April 28
and 30 and May 3 and 4, 1965. Local 172, International Hod Carriers,
Building and Common Laborers Union of America, AFL-CIO, herein
called Laborers Local 172, Prefabricated Concrete, Inc., herein called
Prefabricated, and Eastern Precast Concrete, Inc., herein called
Eastern, were permitted to intervene as parties in interest to the
proceeding. All parties appeared at the hearing and were afforded
full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to adduce evidence bearing on the issues. Thereafter, Local 46
filed a brief which the Board has duly considered.
The National Labor Relations Board has reviewed the rulings
of the Hearing Officer made at the hearing and finds that they are free
from prejudicial error. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
156 NLRB No. 77.
750 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the entire record, the Board makes the following findings :
1. As stipulated by the parties, Slattery is a New York corporation
and Fuller is a New Jersey corporation with offices in the State of
New York. Both are engaged as general contractors in the building
and construction industry in the State of New York, and in the opera-
tion of their businesses each annually receives in excess of $50,000 for
services performed outside the State of New York. The parties con-
cede and we find that Slattery and Fuller are each engaged in com-
merce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
2. Local 46 and Laborers Local 172 are labor organizations within
the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
3. The dispute :
A. The facts
Local 46 represents construction employees in New York City and
vicinity who handle steel reinforcing material used in making rein-
forced concrete. They are responsible for two distinct operations :
cutting and bending steel rods and then placing and tying such rods
in forms or beds preparatory to the pouring of concrete. Increasingly,
construction specifications have called for the use of concrete sections
which are fabricated away from the site and are then delivered at
the project ready for erection. This has resulted in a decrease in the
amount of work available to Local 46 members and has prompted
demands by Local 46 that the use of prefabricated concrete be dis-
continued and that all reinforced concrete sections be made at the
construction site, or, in the alternative, if prefabricated concrete be
used, that it be made in New York City where Local 46 members would
be employed at the yards producing the prefabricated material.
Prefabricated is one of a number of companies, related through
common ownership, which supply prefabricated concrete materials for
use in New York City construction projects. Heretofore, Prefabri-
cated and Precrete, Inc., a related company, had production facilities
on Long Island. In November 1960, after a dispute with Local 46
over the employment of its members at their Long Island yards, Pre-
fabricated and Precrete entered into agreements with Local 46 in
which they agreed to give to Local 46 members the right to perform
a portion of the work at their yards. Under the agreements, Local 46
members would perform all the cut and bend work, and a Local 46
member would be hired as a working foreman over all placing and
tying work. The placing and tying work itself was performed by
members of a New York City Laborers local. Six months later, the
Union renewed its demand that its members perform all of the placing
and tying work as well as the cut and bend work at the yards. Pre-
THE METALLIC LATHERS UNION, LOCAL 46 751
fabricated and Precrete, Inc., brought charges against Local 46 under
Section 8(b) (4) (D) of the Act and, in the ensuing Section 10(k)
proceeding, the Board awarded the disputed placing and tying work
to employees represented by the New York City Laborers' local.' The
assignment of the cut and bend work to Local 46 was not in dispute.
In August 1964, Prefabricated ceased operations at its Long Island
yard. Its movable equipment was sold to a wholly owned subsidiary,
Eastern, which commenced production of prefabricated concrete
materials in September 1964, at a yard in Howell Township, New
Jersey. Eastern's yard, being in New Jersey, is outside the territorial
jurisdiction of Local 46, and Eastern's employees, whose rates of pay
are less than those of Local 46 members, are represented by Laborers
Local 172, which has intervened in this proceeding. Eastern's employ-
ees do no cut and bend work. Instead, Eastern's requirements of rein-
forcing steel are supplied by steel manufacturers and wholesalers,
already cut and bent to specifications. After August 1964, Prefabri-
cated continued to bid on contracts calling for prefabricated concrete,
but subcontracted all or most of the actual fabrication to Eastern.
The instant dispute arose at two construction projects in New York
City where Prefabricated was a subcontractor for the delivery of
prefabricated concrete materials. Slattery was the general contractor
at one of the sites; Fuller at the other. Slattery first learned of pos-
sible difficulties with Local 46 over the use of Prefabricated's con-
crete productions on February 1, 1965, when it was told by a Local 46
business agent that he would not allow Prefabricated to "prefabricate
the material off the site and bring it to the job and erect it." Ten days
later, the business agent repeated the same threat to a Slattery rep-
resentative and added the comment that Prefabricated "was over in
Jersey using some crummy union ... [and] he wasn't going to allow
work to be taken from the members of his local." Fuller first learned
of possible difficulties with Local 46 on March 3, 1965, and was there-
after told that the reason for the trouble was the use of "precast" on
the job. On March 8, 1965, the Union ordered its members working
for subcontractors responsible for onsite reinforced concrete construc-
tion to walk off the job at both construction sites. They remained off
the job until March 29, 1965, when they returned to work following the
issuance of a temporary injunction against Local 46 by the United
States District Court for the Southern District of New York pursuant
to Section 10(1) of the Act. Slattery and Fuller have filed charges
against Local 46 alleging violations of both Section 8 (b) (4) (B) and
(D). Only the 8 (b) (4) (D) allegation is before us in this proceeding.
' Local 46, Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers International Union, AFL-CIO, et al.
( Precrete, Inc.), 136 NLRB 1072.
752 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
B. The contentions of the parties
By filing charges under Section 8 (b) (4) (D) of the Act, the Charg-
ing Parties assert that a jurisdictional dispute exists within the mean-
ing of the Act. At the hearing, counsel for Slattery took the position
that any attempt by a union to force an employer to award particular
work to members of a particular labor organization is such a dispute.
Local 46 on the other hand, argues that no jurisdictional dispute exists
within the meaning of the Act because there are no conflicting cl aims to
particular work by rival employee groups. Local 46 also argues that
the notice of hearing should be quashed because the parties have agreed
to a private settlement of the dispute, but that if the Board asserts
jurisdiction in the instant cases, the disputed work should be awarded
to employees it represents rather than to employees represented by
Laborers Local 172. Laborers Local 172 asserts that the disputed work
should be awarded to its members.
C. The applicability of the statute
It is not clear from the record whether the object of Local 46's
pressure against the Charging Parties was to force them to cease
using any prefabricated concrete material , or whether it was to force
them to put pressure on Prefabricated to resume operations in New
York. We are not required in this proceeding to resolve this factual
question because, whether Local 46's dispute was with the Charging
Parties over the use of prefabricated material, or with Prefabricated
over whether it should operate in New York or New Jersey, we do not
believe that a jurisdictional dispute exists within the meaning of
Section 8 (b) (4) (D) of the Act.
The Charging Parties cannot claim to be in the predicament for
which relief under Section 8 (b) (4) (D) was designed, namely, that
of an employer caught between the conflicting claims of rival groups
of employees for the assignment of work since, under either of the
aforesaid objects, only the employee group represented by Local 46
is directly involved in the particular dispute arising from Local 46's
demands against the Charging Parties that have led to this proceeding.
Thus, if the dispute was essentially between Local 46 and the Charg-
ing Parties over the use of prefabricated concrete materials, there is
no jurisdictional dispute within the meaning of the Act .2 If, on the
2 See, e .g, Highway Truckdrivers & Helpers, Local 107, International Brotherhood of
Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America , Independent ( Safeway
Stores, Incorporated), 134 NLRB 1320; Sheet Metal Workers International Association,
Local Union No. 272 ; etc. (Valley Sheet Metal Company ), 136 NLRB 1402 ; Brotherhood
of Teamsters and Auto Truck Drivers , Local 70 , International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeur8, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Independent ( Hills Transportation
Co ), 136 NLRB 1086 ; Wood, Wire & Metal Lathers International Union , Local 328,
AFL-CIO ( Acoustics & Specialties, Inc ), 139 NLRB 598.
MARINE COOKS AND STEWARDS UNION 753
other hand, the dispute was essentially between Local 46 and • Pre-
fabricated over whether Prefabricated should operate in New York
or in New Jersey, we arrive at the same conclusion for somewhat dif-
ferent reasons . Local 46's complaint against Prefabricated was that
it had changed its method of operations by moving to New Jersey
with the effect of eliminating job opportunities for members of Local
46. A union's protest over such a change does not become a jurisdic-
tional dispute simply because another group of employees is there-
after obtained to do the work .8
To make relief available to employers under Section 8 (b) (4) (D) in
such a situation would restrict unions from applying legitimate eco-
nomic pressure in response to changes in production methods or to
changes in location which employees believe are detrimental to their
interests.
Upon the basis of the foregoing, we conclude that Local 46's strike
against subcontractors of the Charging Parties on March 8, 1965, did
not violate Section 8(b) (4) (D) of the Act. The disputes herein are
not, therefore, disputes within the meaning of Section 10 (k). Accord-
ingly, we shall quash the notice of hearing.4
[The Board quashed the notice of hearing.]
S See International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 292, AFL-CIO ( Franklin
Broadcasting Company ( Radio Station WMIN) ), 126 NLRB 1212 ; National Association
of Broadcast Employees and Technicians , AFL-CIO, et at. (Gordon Broadcasting of San
Diego, Inc., d/b/a Radio Station KSDO), 127 NLRB 1070; Chauffeurs, Teamsters and
Flelpers , Local 331, International Brotherhood of Teamsters , etc. (Bulletin Company),
139 NLRB 1391.
^ N ember Fanning concurs in this conclusion on the basis of his dissenting opinion in
Local 5, United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipe-
fitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO (Arthur Venneri Company),
145 NLRB 1580, 1601.
Marine Cooks and Stewards Union , Member of Pacific District,
Seafarers International Union of North America, AFL-CIO
and Pacific Maritime Association and Matson Terminals, Inc.
and International Longshoremen 's and Warehousemen 's Union,
Local 13, and International Longshoremen 's' and Warehouse-
men's Union . Case No. 21 -CD-194. January 11, 1966
DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, following a charge by Pacific Maritime
Association and Matson Terminals, Inc., herein called PMS and
Terminals, respectively, alleging that the Marine Cooks and Stewards
Union, member. of Pacific District, Seafarers International Union of
156 NLRB No. 81.