Local 522, Lumber Drivers, Warehousemen, Etc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 17, 1960

129 N.L.R.B. 376 (N.L.R.B. 1960)

376 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Commercial and Industrial Life Insurance Company is an employer within
the meaning of Section 2(2) of the Act, and is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
2. Stationary Engineers Local Union No. 707, International Union of Operating
Engineers , AFL-C10, is a labor organization within .the meaning of Section 2(5)
of the Act.
3. The following unit of the Respondent's employees is appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:
All operating and maintenance engineers , including the chief engineer and
apprentice engineer , employed by the Respondent at its Houston , Texas, office
building, but excluding all other employees and all supervisors as defined in
the Act.
4. On December 1, 1959, and at all times thereafter , the Charging Party was,
and now is , the representative of a majority of the Respondent 's employees in the
appropriate unit described above for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the Act.
5. By refusing on February 10, 1960, and thereafter , to bargain collectively with
the Charging Party as the exclusive representative of all its employees in the above-
described appropriate unit, the Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section 8( a)(5) and (1 ) of the Act.
6. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting com-
merce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to the recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the Labor-Management
Relations Act, we hereby notify our employees that:
WE WILL bargain collectively upon request with Stationary Engineers Local
Union No. 707, International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL-CIO, as the
exclusive bargaining representative of all our employees in the appropriate unit
described below with respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and
other terms and conditions of employment, and, if an agreement is reached,
embody such understanding in a signed contract. The appropriate unit is:
All operating and maintenance engineers, including the chief engineer
and apprentice engineer, employed at our Houston, Texas, office building,
but excluding all other employees and all supervisors as defined in the Act.
COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY,
Employer.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must not be
altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
Local Union 522, Lumber Drivers, Warehousemen and Handlers,
International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Ware-
housemen and Helpers of America and Republic Wire Corpo-
ration. Case No. P2-CC-87. October 17, 1960
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon charges filed on April 25, 1960, by Republic Wire Corpora-
tion, herein called Republic, the General Counsel for the National
129 NLRB No. 45.
LOCAL 522, LUMBER DRIVERS, WAREHOUSEMEN, ETC. 377
Labor Relations Board, herein respectively called the General Counsel
and the Board, by the Regional Director for the Twenty-second
Region, issued a complaint dated May 6, 1960, against Local Union
522, Lumber Drivers, Warehousemen and Handlers, International
Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers
of America, herein called Respondent, alleging that the Respondent
had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 8 (b) (4) (i) and (ii) (B) and
Section 2(6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, herein
called the Act. Copies of the charges, complaint, and notice of hear-
ing were duly served upon the parties.
On May 27, 1960, Respondent filed an answer to the complaint
wherein it admitted all the allegations of the complaint.'
On June 8, 1960, Respondent and the General Counsel executed a
motion to transfer proceeding to the Board, which was filed with the
Board. This motion contained a stipulation that, in the event the
Board granted said motion, the charge, complaint and notice of hear-
ing, answer, order postponing hearing in the instant case and the
Board's Decision and Order in Local Union 522, Lumber Drivers,
Warehousemen and Handlers, International Brotherhood of Team-
sters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America (Mack
Lumber Company), 126 NLRB 297, including the entire record
therein, should constitute the entire record in this matter upon which
the Board should make findings of fact and conclusions of law. The
parties further stipulated that they waived hearing and oral argu-
ment before a Trial Examiner, the making of findings of fact and con-
clusions of law by a Trial Examiner, the issuance of an Intermediate
Report and recommended order by a Trial Examiner, and oral argu-
ment before the Board. The parties further agreed that the com-
plaint and the Respondent's answer shall constitute a stipulation of
the facts in this matter upon which the Board may make findings of
fact and conclusions of law.
On June 15,1960, the Board approved the aforesaid stipulation and
made it part of the record herein, and transferred the proceeding to,
and continued it before, the Board for the purpose of making findings
of fact, conclusions of law, and the issuance of a Decision and Order.
Subsequently, the General Counsel and the Respondent filed briefs.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members
Rodgers and Fanning].
While Respondent admitted, for the purpose of this proceeding , the alleged violations
of the amended Act, it refused to enter into a settlement stipulation because of its dis-
agreement with the scope of the remedial order requested by the General Counsel.
378 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Upon the basis of the aforesaid stipulation and the entire record in
the case, including the briefs filed by the parties, the Board makes the
following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANIES
Republic Wire Corporation, a New Jersey Corporation, is engaged
in the manufacture, sale, and distribution of steel, wire, nails, and
related products in Carteret, New Jersey. During the year ending
March 31, 1960, it manufactured, sold, and distributed at its Carteret
plant, products valued at in excess of $1,000,000 of which products
valued at in excess of $1,000,000 were shipped from said plant in inter-
state commerce directly to States of the United States other than the
State of New Jersey.
Kagen-Dixon Wire Corporation, herein called Kagen, is engaged at
Port Reading, New Jersey, in the manufacture and sale of wire prod-
ucts. Kagen annually ships products valued at in excess of $50,000
directly to points outside the State of New Jersey.
National Wire Products Company, herein called National, is en-
gaged, in the Borough of the Bronx, New York City, in the manufac-
ture and sale of wire products. National annually purchases products
at in excess of $50,000 from points outside of the State of New York.
We find that Republic, Kagen, and National are employers engaged
in commerce within the meaning of the Act.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The complaint alleges, the answer admits, and we find, that the
Respondent is a labor organization within the meaning of Section
2 (5) of the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
The essential and uncontroverted facts in this case, as established by
the complaint and the answer and the record as a whole are as follows:
Kagen does business with National, a customer of Republic.
Andrew Peterson, an independent trucking contractor, pursuant to
agreements between and among Peterson, Capra Brothers, Inc., a
corporation engaged in the trucking business, and Republic, in the
course and conduct of its business picks up and delivers goods, articles,
materials, and merchandise which are sold to Republic, and makes
up and delivers goods, articles, materials, and merchandise which are
manufactured and sold by Republic.
The complaint alleges, the Respondent admits, and we hereby find
that from on or about March 29, 1960, Respondent by its officers,
agents, and representatives, including its president, Richard Brown,
and its vice president, Nunzio Provenzano, has engaged in and is en-
LOCAL 522, LUMBER DRIVERS, WAREHOUSEMEN, ETC. 379
gaging in, and by picketing, requests, appeals, orders, instructions,
and other means has induced and encouraged, and is inducing and en-
couraging, individuals employed by Kagen and National, and other
persons, now unknown, engaged in commerce or in an industry affect-
ing commerce, to engage in, a strike or a refusal in the course of their
employment to use, manufacture, process, transport or otherwise
handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities or
to perform services for their respective employers.
The complaint further alleges, the Respondent admits, and we
hereby find that on or about April 11, 1960, and on various dates dur-
ing April 1960, Respondent by its officers, agents, and representatives,
including Richard Brown and Nunzio Provenzano, threatened, co-
erced, and restrained, and is threatening, coercing, and restraining
Kagen and Peterson and other persons, now unknown, engaged in
commerce or in an industry affecting commerce.
The complaint further alleges, Respondent admits and we hereby
find that the Respondent engaged in the aforementioned activities
with an object thereof being (a) to force, and coerce Kagen, National,
Peterson, and other persons, now unknown, engaged in commerce or
in an industry affecting commerce to cease using, selling, handling,
transporting, or otherwise dealing in the products of, and to cease
doing business with Republic; and (b) to force and coerce Republic
to recognize and bargain with the Respondent as the representative of
the employees of Republic although Respondent has not been certified
as the representative of such employees in accordance with the provi-
sions of Section 9 of the Act.
The complaint finally alleges, and Respondent's answer admits that
by all the aforementioned acts committed for the aforementioned ob-
jects, occurring in connection with the operations of Republic, Kagen,
National, and Peterson, the respondent did engage in and is now
engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section
8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (B) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
On the basis of our aforementioned findings of fact we find that the
Respondent by the acts and for the objectives, heretofore described,
has violated and is violating Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (B) and
Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act as amended.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Republic, Kagen, and National are employers within the mean-
ing of Section 2 (2) of the Act.
2. The Respondent is a labor organization within the meaning of
Section 2 (5) of the Act.
3. By inducing and encouraging individuals employed by Kagen,
National, and other persons, now unknown, engaged in commerce or
in an industry affecting commerce to engage in a strike or refusal in
380 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the course of their employment to perform services and by threaten-
ing, coercing, or restraining Kagen, Peterson, and other persons, now
unknown, engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce
with the object of forcing or requiring Kagen, National, Peterson, and
other persons, now unknown, engaged in commerce or in an industry
affecting commerce to cease doing business with Republic, and/or re-
quiring Republic to recognize and bargain with the Respondent, in
the absence of a certification as bargaining representative of the em-
ployees of Republic, the Respondent has engaged in and is engaging
in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (b) (4) (i)
and (ii) (B) of the Act.
4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices having occurred in connec-
tion with the operations of Republic, Kagen, and National, as set forth
above, have a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic,
and commerce among the several States and substantially affect com-
merce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE REMEDY
As we have found that the Respondent has engaged in and is engag-
ing in unfair labor practices in violation of Section 8 (b) (4) (i) and
(ii) (B) of the Act, we shall order that it cease and desist therefrom
and take certain affirmative action to remedy the unfair labor prac-
tices and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
The scope of our remedial order is the only contested issue in this
case. The General Counsel urges the issuance of a "broad" cease and
desist order, i.e., one that covers the Respondent's future conduct with
respect to "any other employer over whom the Board would assert
jurisdiction." The General Counsel argues that such broad order is
warranted because other employers and persons in addition to Repub-
lic, namely National, Kagen, Peterson and persons unknown engaged
in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce are involved in the
instant violation, and also because the Respondent has previously com-
mitted similar violations of Section 8(b) (4) (A) and (B) of the Act
prior to the 1959 amendments. The Respondent in reliance on the de-
cision of the United States Supreme Court in Communications Work-
ers of America v. N.L.R.R.2 contends that a broad cease and desist
order is inappropriate and that its prior violations of Section 8 (b) (4)
(A) and (B) must be disregarded for the purposes herein because
they occurred prior to the Landrum.-Griffin amendments 3 to the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act.
The Respondent admitted, and we have found that the Respondent
induced and encouraged not only individuals employed by Kagen,
National, and Peterson to engage in strikes or refusals in the course
s 362 U S. 479
2 Public Law 86-257, 73 Stat . 519, 29 USCA 141, 159.
LOCAL 522, LUMBER DRIVERS, WAREHOUSEMEN, ETC. 381
of their employment to perform services for their respective employers
but also individuals employed by other persons, now unknown, en-
gaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce. This admis-
sion and finding was without limitation as to geographical location
or jurisdictional area of the Respondent. In these circumstances we
believe that an order protecting not only Kagen, National, and Peter-
son, but other secondary employers as well, is justified and necessary
to effectuate the policies of the Act.
We do not agree with the Respondent that the United States
Supreme Court's decision in the Communication Workers case un-
conditionally enjoins the Board from extending the coverage of its
remedial order to any other primary employer except the one directly
involved in a Board proceeding. Rather, we construe that decision
to permit the Board to extend its protection to other employers if
there is justification or necessity therefor. We find such justification
and necessity here because the record shows that the Respondent has
previously committed violations of Section 8(b) (4) (A) and (B) of
the Act by engaging in secondary boycott activities against another
employer within the Respondent's territorial jurisdiction in the State
of New Jersey and that employer's suppliers.4 In the case involving
that employer, the Board's Decision and Order issued in January of
1960, after the enactment of the Landrum-Griffin amendments of 1959.
In disregard of the Board's order and while its enforcement was pend-
ing, the Respondent, hardly 2 months thereafter, engaged in the instant
violations, showing a pattern of conduct contemptuous of the Act.
The distinction which the Respondent tries to draw between the
language of the Act before the Landrum-Griffin amendments, and
after, with respect to the application of the amended Act to "indi-
viduals rather than employees" and to "refusal" rather than "concerted
refusal" do not appear to us pertinent herein. In both the Mach case
and the instant case employees were induced by the Respondent Union
to strike and to refuse to work, and there was no question in either
case as to individuals other than employees being induced to a refusal
other than a concerted refusal. Nevertheless, in the Order which we
shall issue herein we shall use the somewhat broader language of the
amended Act, as it is our customary procedure to apply the language
of the Act as written at the time of issuance of the Order.
In a recent case,5 decided by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals on
July 11, 1960, after the Supereme Court decision in the Communica-
tion Workers, the court in a situation very similar to the one herein
said as-
4 Mach Lumber Company, supra
5 N L R B v Brewery and Beer Distributor Drivers, Helpers and Platform Men, Local
830, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs. Warehousemen and Helpers of
America (Delaware Valley Beer Distributors Assn ), 281 F 2d 319.
382 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The attack here upon the inclusion of persons other than the par-
ticular primary and secondary employers named in the order is
not well taken. From the very pattern shown in the testimony
before the Board the danger of the occurrence of the prohibited
conduct is much wider than inducements confined to employees
of the specifically mentioned secondary employers. In the same
respect, the danger goes beyond action directed against the spe-
cifically named primary employers. Therefore, the widening of
the prohibition beyond those named is not objectionable.
We believe that the above language is applicable herein. We shall
therefore issue a cease and desist order applying to other primary
employers as well as Republic, but limiting the scope to employers
within the jurisdictional area of the Respondent in the State of New
Jersey wherein the instant violation and the violation of the Mach
Lumber Company case occurred so as to meet any objection that any
order would apply to "any other employer in the United States or to
any other place where the Board's writ may run."'
ORDER
Upon the entire record in this case and pursuant to Section 10(c)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondent Union, Local
Union 522, Lumber Drivers, Warehousemen and Handlers, Interna-
tional Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and
Helpers of America, its officers, representatives, agents, successors,
and assigns, shall :
1. Cease and desist from :
(a) Engaging in, or inducing or encouraging any individual em-
ployed by Kagen-Dixon Wire Corporation, National Wire Products
Company or by any other person engaged in commerce or in an in-
dustry affecting commerce to engage in, a strike or a refusal in the
course of his employment to use, manufacture, process, transport, or
otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or com-
modities or to perform any services where an object thereof is to force
or require Kagen-Dixon Wire Corporation, National Wire Products
Company or any other person engaged in commerce or in an industry
affecting commerce to cease using, selling, handling, transporting, or
otherwise dealing in the products of Republic Wire Corporation or
of any other employer within the territorial jurisdiction in the State
"Ibid. As the General Counsel requested an order protecting primary employers "over
whom the Board would assert jurisdiction ," and as the parties have not litigated exten-
sion of the order beyond this scope , we shall accept this limitation for the purposes of the
instant case only. This is without prejudice to future consideration of the applicability
of our orders to primary employers not themselves engaged in commerce , if secondary
employers are within the Board 's jurisdiction.
LOCAL 522, LUMBER DRIVERS, WAREHOUSEMEN, ETC . 383
of New Jersey of the Respondent, Local 522, Lumber Drivers, Ware-
housemen and Handlers, International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, over whom the
National Labor Relations Board would assert jurisdiction, or to cease
doing business with Republic Wire Corporation or with any other
employer within the Respondent's territorial jurisdiction in the State
of New Jersey, over whom the Board would assert jursdiction, or to
force or to require Republic Wire Corporation or any other employer
within the Respondent's territorial jurisdiction in the State of New
Jersey over whom the Board would assert jurisdiction, to recognize
or bargain with the Respondent as the collective-bargaining repre-
sentative of its employees, unless Respondent has been certified as the
representative of such employees under the provisions of Section 9
of the National Labor Relations Act.
(b) Threatening, coercing, or restraining Kagen-Dixon Wire Cor-
poration, Andrew Peterson, or any other person engaged in commerce
or in an industry affecting commerce where an object thereof is to
force or to require Kagen-Dixon Wire Corporation, Andrew Peterson,
or any other person engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting
commerce to cease using, selling, handling, transporting, or otherwise
dealing in the products of Republic Wire Corporation, or of any
other employer within the Respondent's territorial jurisdiction in the
State of New Jersey over whom the National Labor Relations Board
would assert jurisdiction, or to cease doing business with the Republic
Wire Corporation or with any other employer within the Respond-
ent's territorial jurisdiction in the State of New Jersey over whom
the Board would assert jurisdiction, or to force or to require Republic
Wire Corporation or any other employer within the Respondent's
territorial jurisdiction in the State of New Jersey over whom the
Board would assert jurisdiction, to recognize or bargain with the Re-
spondent as the collective-bargaining representative of its employees
unless the Respondent has been certified as the representative of such
employees under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Post in conspicuous places in the Respondent's business offices,
meeting halls, and all places where notices to members are customarily
posted, copies of the notice attached hereto marked "Appendix."'
Copies of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for
the Twenty-second Region, shall, after being duly signed by the Re-
spondent's authorized representative, be posted by Respondent im-
mediately upon receipt thereof and be maintained by it for 60 con-
7 In the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of
Appeals, there shall be substituted for the words "Pursuant to a Decision and Order" the
words "Pursuant to a Decree of the United States Court of Appeals, Enforcing an Order."
384 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
secutive days thereafter. Reasonable steps shall be taken to insure
that such notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other
material.
(b) Sign and mail sufficient copies of said notice to the Regional
Director for the Twenty-second Region for posting, Republic Wire
Corporation, Kagen-Dixon Wire Corporation, National Wire Prod-
ucts Company and Andrew Peterson willing, at all locations where
notices to their respective employees are customarily posted.
(c) Notify the Regional Director, in writing, within 10 days from
the date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply
herewith.
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF LOCAL UNION 522, LUMBER DRIVERS, WARE-
HOUSEMEN AND HANDLERS, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAM-
STERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA; TO
ALL INDIVIDUALS EMPLOYED BY REPUBLIC WIRE CORPORATION; NA-
TIONAL WIRE PRODUCTS COMPANY ; KAGEN-DIxON WIRE CORPORATION
AND ANDREW PETERSON; AND TO ALL EMPLOYEES OF OTHER EM-
PLOYERS WHO ARE REPRESENTED BY US
Pursuant to a Decision and Order 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 engage in, or induce or encourage any individual
employed by Kagen-Dixon Wire Corporation, National Wire
Products Company or any other person engaged in commerce or
in an industry affecting commerce to engage in a strike or a re-
fusal in the course of his employment to use, manufacture, process,
transport or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, ma-
terials or commodities or to perform any services where an object
thereof is to force or require Kagen-Dixon Wire Corporation,
National Wire Products Company or any other person engaged
in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce to cease using,
selling, handling, transporting, or otherwise dealing in the prod-
ucts of Republic Wire Corporation or of any other employer
within our territorial jurisdiction in the State of New Jersey
over whom the National Labor Relations Board would assert
jurisdiction, or to cease doing business with Republic Wire Cor-
poration or with any other employer within our territorial juris-
diction in the State of New Jersey over whom the Board would
assert jurisdiction, or to force or require Republic Wire Cor-
poration or any other employer within our territorial jurisdiction
in the State of New Jersey over whom the Board would assert
jurisdiction to recognize or bargain with us as the collective bar-
EDWARDS TRUCKING COMPANY 385
gaining representative of its employees, unless we have been
certified as the representative of such employees under the pro-
visions of Section 9 of the National Labor Relations Act.
WE WILL NOT threaten, coerce, or restrain Kagen-Dixon Wire
Corporation, Andrew Peterson or any other person engaged in
commerce or in an industry affecting commerce where an object
thereof is to force or require Kagen-Dixon Wire Corporation,
Andrew Peterson or any other person engaged in commerce or
in an industry affecting commerce to cease using, selling, han-
dling, transporting, or otherwise dealing in the products of Re-
public Wire Corporation or of any other employer within our
territorial jurisdiction in the State of New Jersey over whom the
National Labor Relations Board would assert jurisdiction, or to
cease doing business with Republic Wire Corporation or with any
other employer within our territorial jurisdiction in the State
of New Jersey over whom the Board would assert jurisdiction, or
to force or require Republic Wire Corporation or any other em-
ployer within our jurisdiction in the State of New Jersey over
whom the Board would assert jurisdiction to recognize or bargain
with us as the collective-bargaining representative of its em-
ployees unless we have been certified as the representative of such
employees under the provisions of Section 9 of the Act.
LOCAL UNION 522, LUMBER DRIVERS,
WAREHOUSEMEN AND HANDLERS, INTER-
NATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS,
CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND
HELPERS OF AMERICA,
Labor Organization,.
Dated---------------- By-------------------------------------
(Representative) (Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof,
and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
R. E. Edwards d/b/a Edwards Trucking Company and Team-
sters, Chauffeurs , Warehousemen and Helpers , Local Union
No. 991. Case No. 15-CA-1562. October 18, 1960
DECISION AND ORDER
On April 15, 1960, Trial Examiner James T. Rasbury issued his
Intermediate Report in the above entitled-proceeding, finding that the
Respondent had engaged in certain unfair labor practices and recom-
mending that he cease and desist therefrom and take certain afIirma-
129 NLRB No. 47.
586439-61-vol. 12 9-2 6