Cement Masons Union Local 337

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 30, 1971

192 N.L.R.B. 377 (N.L.R.B. 1971)

CEMENT MASONS UNION LOCAL 337
Cement Masons Union Local 337, Operative Plaster-
ers' and Cement Masons ' International Association
of the United States and Canada , AFL-CIO and
California Association of Employers. Case
20-CC-1014
July 30, 1971
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION
CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS FANNING
AND BROWN
On May 4, 1971, the National Labor Relations
Board issued its Decision and Order in the above
case,' finding, inter alia, that the Respondent had
engaged in picketing with signs and handbills in
violation of Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the National
Labor Relations Act, as amended, and ordering it to
case and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative
action. Thereafter the General Counsel filed a motion
for reconsideration, which was duly served on the
parties, and which requested the Board to (1) make
appropriate findings with regard to the "TO CON-
SUMERS ONLY . . ." picketing which began on
May 2, 1970; (2) make appropriate findings as to the
remaining secondary employers alleged in the com-
plaint; and (3) make any additional appropriate
findings necessary to correct the sequence of events,
including correcting the date on which the Trial
Examiner found that handbilling began.
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, having duly considered the matter, has
decided to grant, in part, and deny, in part, the
General Counsel's motion.
The complaint in this case was based on an
allegedly unlawful product boycott imposed by
Respondent in furtherance of a primary labor dispute
with Howard W. Whitney, the general contractor on a
reasidential housing development. Thus, commencing
on May 2, 1970,2 Respondent picketed the develop-
1 190 NLRB No. 46.
2 All dates refer to 1970.
3 N.L R.B. v. Fruit and Vegetable Packers & Warehousemen, Local 760,
377 U.S. 58.
377
ment on weekends when no employees of Whitney or
subcontractors were present, with signs stating:
TO CONSUMERS ONLY
Cement Masons Work Done By
General Contractor Below
Standard Established by Cement
Masons Local 337, Monterey County
PLEASE DO NOT PURCHASE
THESE HOMES
This picketing terminated on July 29 and, on
August 15, was followed by the picketing and
handbilling which furnished the specific basis for our
original conclusion, which we hereby reaffirm, that
Respondent violated Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) of the Act.
However, in our initial Decision and Order, no
specific finding was made with respect to the
picketing which occurred between May 2 and July 29.
Upon reconsideration, we find merit in the General
Counsel's request to this phase of Respondent's
conduct since the issues arising therefrom were
alleged and fully litigated.
As in the case of the picketing and handbilling
which began on August 15, the May 2 picket sign,
urging a consumer boycott against Schuler,Invest-
ments, the owner of the homes and a neutral person,
imposed direct coercive pressure on Schuler to force
him to cease doing business with Whitney, the
primary employer. Furthermore, and for the reasons
set forth by the Trial Examiner in finding the August
15 picketing and handbilling unlawful, the May 2
conduct was neither privileged consumer picketing
within the Tree Fruits doctrine3 nor protected as ".. .
publicity, other than picketing . . ." within the
proviso to Section 8(b)(4).4 Accordingly, we find that
the May 2 picketing violated Section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B).5
Finally, we find no merit in the General Counsel's
request that certain named subcontractors of Whitney
be included in our remedial order as neutral employ-
ers. In our opinion, -these subcontractors doing
business with the primary employer were not known
to have been the object of any direct pressures to force
them to cease doing business with Whitney, and the
unlawful product boycott directed at Schuler was too
remote to constitute 8(b)(4)(ii) restraint and coercion
against these subcontractors.
4 Cf. N.I,.R B. v. Serreile, Inc., 377 U.S. 46.
5 The remedy provided in our initial Decision and Order is not affected
by this additional finding and need not be modified.
192 NLRB No. 52
378 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Accordingly, the General Counsel's motion is to the picketing which occurred between May 2, 1970,
hereby granted t•insofar as it requests , the Board to and July "29; 1970 ;-= but in-alljother respects is hereby
make additional and clarifying findings with respect denied.