Berg Drywall, LLC

National Labor Relations Board - Unpublished Board Decisions

Aug 18, 2010

28-RC-006684 (N.L.R.B. Aug. 18, 2010)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
BERG DRYWALL, LLC
Employer
and Case 28-RC-6684
SOUTHWEST REGIONAL
COUNCIL OF CARPENTERS
Petitioner
DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER
The Intervenor International Union of Painters and Allied Trades, District Council
15, Local Union #86's Request for Review of the Regional Director's Decision and
Direction of Election is granted as it raises substantial issues warranting review with
respect to whether the drywall tapers and finishers constitute a separate appropriate craft
unit and are entitled to a Globe self-determination election.' Having carefully reviewed
the record, we affirm the Regional Director's conclusion that the drywall tapers and
finishers do not constitute a separate craft unit. 2 In doing so, we emphasize that the
framers, hangers, finishers, and tapers are classified as and function as one drywall
journeymen craft in the State of Arizona. All drywall journeymen who are in the
Carpenters Union in Arizona are trained in the same apprenticeship program, with no
separate, formal apprenticeship program for drywall taping and finishing work. All
drywall journeymen, including tapers and framers, share a significant community of
interest, including common supervision of all drywall j oumeymen under the
superintendent and comparable wages, benefits, and working conditions. All drywalt
journeymen work the same hours at the same location and take breaks and lunch breaks
at the same time. All drywall journeymen are cross-trained and there is evidence of
cross-over work on an as-needed basis. Finally, the area practice in Arizona since 2001
and the bargaining history between the Petitioner and the Employer since 2008 support
an overall unit. Based on the above, we find that the drywall tapers and finishers do not
constitute a distinct and homogeneous group of skilled journeyman craftsmen. Burns &
Roe Services Corp., 313 NLRB 1307, 1308 (1994).
See Globe Machine & Stamping Co., 3 NLRB 294 (1937).
2 In affirming the Regional Director's decision, we do not rely on his reasoning that "because the
petitioned-for unit is an appropriate unit, my inquiry ends," or that "the Intervenor has not established that
the tapers and finishers are such a 'distinct and homogeneous group' that I must find them to be a separate
appropriate unit." (emphasis added).
Accordingly, we affinn the Regional Director's conclusion and remand the case to
3the Regional Director for farther appropriate action.
WILMA B. LIEBMAN, CHAIRMAN
MARK GASTON PEARCE, MEMBER
BRIAN E. HAYES, MEMBER
Dated, Washington, D.C., August 18, 2010.
3 The Intervenor's motion to stay the election is denied as moot.
2