Directors Guild of America, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 30, 1975

218 N.L.R.B. 1156 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

1156 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Directors Guild of America, Inc. and Golden West
Broadcasters and Golden West Videotape Division
and International Alliance of Theatrical Stage
Employees and Moving Picture Machine Opera-
tors of the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO.
Case 31-CD-148
June 30, 1975
DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF
DISPUTE
BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS
JENKINS AND KENNEDY
This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended , follow-
ing a charge filed by Golden West Broadcasters and
Golden West Videotape Division , herein called the
Employer , alleging that Directors Guild of America,
Inc., herein called the Guild , had violated Section
8(b)(4)(D) of the Act. The charge alleges, in
substance , that the Guild, by threats and economic
action, violated the Act in that one of the purposes of
such conduct was to force the Employer to assign
certain work to its members rather than to members
of International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Em-
ployees and Moving Picture Machine Operators of
the United States and Canada, AFL-CIO, herein
called I .A.T.S.E. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was
held in Los Angeles, California , before Hearing
Officer Noel Shipman on April 29, 1975. All parties
appeared and were afforded full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to present evidence bearing on the issues . Thereafter,
the Employer and I .A.T.S.E. filed briefs. These briefs
have been duly considered by the Board.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor • Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding 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 . They are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
makes the following findings:
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Employer, a California corporation with its
principal office and place of business in Los Angeles,
California, is engaged in television and radio broad-
casting. The parties stipulated, and we find, that
during the past year the Employer received goods
and materials valued in excess of $50,000 directly
from sources outside the State of California and that
its gross revenue during that period was in excess of
$500,000.
We find that the Employer is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act
and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to
assert jurisdiction herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
The parties stipulated, and we find, that the Guild
and I .A.T.S.E. are labor organizations within the
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. THE DISPUTE
A. Background and Facts of the Dispute
The Employer is engaged in the operation of
television station KTLA and radio station KMPC in
Los Angeles as well as in providing stage and video
facilities to independent tape producers.
Through its Videotape Division the Employer rents
stage or studio facilities, including equipment and
"below-the-line" personnel' to advertising agencies
and independent producers for their use, on the
Employer's lot and on remote locations, in the
making of commercials and programs recorded on
videotape.
During such productions it is the principal duty of
a stage manager to assist directors and producers in
the performance of their duties. The stage managers
perform routine functions, such as the relaying of
information from the director to the floor, cueing
talent at the request of the booth director, and
making sure that props, sets, and talent are in the
proper place and available as prescribed by the
director or producer during rehearsal and during
shooting. These directions are given through a
communication system utilizing headsets that ties
together the director, who is isolated in a glass booth,
with the lighting director, audio engineer, videotape
engineer, cameramen, and stage managers. The
director's only means of visual contact with the stage
is through a closed circuit monitor, and his only
means of verbal communication with the talent and
crew is through the headsets.
As all of the Employer's technical personnel are
represented by the I.A.T.S.E., the stage manager is
normally a member of the I.A.T.S.E. However, many
of the independent producers who use the Employ-
er's facilities and several major film companies whom
the Employer seeks to acquire as customers are
bound to agreements with the Guild which require
that a second stage manager be represented by the
1 "Below-the-]me" personnel, including stage manager , generally in- "shoot" as opposed to "above-the-line" talent, directors , etc, provided by
cludes the technical personnel , laborers, and craftsmen necessary for a the producer.
218 NLRB No. 175
DIRECTORS GUILD OF AMERICA, INC. 1157
Guild. But since at least 1961, when producers
signatory to the Guild Tape Supplement, requiring
use of a Guild stage manager, have used the
Employer's Videotape Division facilities, there had
been in effect a waiver of the Guild tape contract's
requirement in that the Guild stage managers were
not required to wear headsets and, therefore, did not
actually function as stage managers.
The waiver was rescinded by the Guild in May
1973, however, and a jurisdictional dispute arose
when the Guild threatened that its members would
not work for producers signatory to the Guild Tape
Supplement on productions at the Employer's
Videotape Division facilities unless the duties of
stage manager, including wearing the headset, were
assigned to and performed by Guild members. On
April 12, 1974, the Board issued its Decision and
Determination of Dispute, 210 NLRB No. 6,
awarding the disputed work, "the functions of stage
manager, including wearing the headset on all
videotape productions at the Golden West Videotape
Division," to employees of the Employer represented
by I.A.T.S.E.
Although by letter dated May 2, 1974, the Guild
indicated its willingness to fully comply with the
Board's decision, thereafter it demanded that the
work tasks of the stage manager be assigned to a
Guild, member on productions by independent
producers signatory to the Guild Tape Supplement
who contract with the Employer for its Videotape
Division facilities and crews at remote locations. On
February 26, 1975, the Guild implemented its
demand by informing the Employer that the Guild
did not consider the Board's prior award applicable
to productions at remote locations and threatened
that unless a Guild stage manager was employed for
the "People's Choice Awards Show," for which the
Employer was to supply videotape facilities, equip-
ment, and below-the-line crew, no other Guild
members would be allowed to work the show,
including the director already hired to work the
show.
To prevent cancellation of the show, I.A.T.S.E. and
the Employer, on a one-time-only, nonprecedential
basis, agreed under protest to allow a Guild stage
manager to wear a headset and work on the show in
addition to the regular I.A.T.S.E. stage managers.
Thereafter, the instant charge was filed.
The I.A.T.S.E. has continued to demand that,
pursuant to its contract with the Employer, the work
tasks of stage manager, including wearing the
headset, continue to be assigned to members of the
I.A.T.S.E. Thus, the Guild created the jurisdictional
dispute herein over the stage manager's work tasks
being performed with the Employer 's Videotape
Division facilities on remote locations because of the
conflicting jurisdiction provisions of the Employer-
I.A.T.S.E. contract and the Guild Tape Supplement.
B. The Work in Dispute
The work in dispute involves the functions of the
stage manager on productions taped with the
facilities and crews of the Employer's Videotape
Division on remote locations 2 by production compa-
nies signatory to the Guild's Tape Supplement
agreement.
C. Contentions of the Parties
The I.A.T.S.E. contends that the disputed work
tasks should be awarded exclusively to employees of
the Employer who are members of or are represented
by the I.A.T.S.E. for all videotape productions with
the facilities of the Videotape Division on remote
locations as well as on the Employer's lot.
The Guild's position is that the disputed work
should be awarded to employees of production
companies who are members of or are represented by
the Guild for all videotape productions, with the
facilities of the Videotape Division on remote
locations produced by production companies signa-
tory to the Guild Tape Supplement.
The Employer contends that the ' disputed work
should be awarded to employees of the Employer
represented by the I.A.T.S.E. for all productions with
the facilities of the Videotape Division on remote
locations as well as on the Employer's lot.
D. Applicability of the Statute
Before the Board may proceed with a determina-
tion of dispute pursuant to Section 10(k) of the Act, it
must be satisfied that there is reasonable cause to
believe that Section 8(b)(4)(D) has been violated, and
that there is no agreed-upon method for the
voluntary adjustment of the dispute.
The facts show that the Employer assigned the
work to its employees who are members of or are
represented by the I.A.T.S.E. The Guild demanded
that the Employer take the work away from members
of the I.A.T.S.E. and assign it to its members. In
support of its demand, the Guild threatened a work
stoppage. Based on the foregoing, and the record as a
whole, we find that reasonable cause exists to believe
that the Guild violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act.
The parties have not agreed upon a voluntary
method of settling this jurisdictional dispute. Accord-
ingly, the matter is properly before the Board for
determination.
2 "Remote locations" include all locations other than the Employer 's lot at 5800 Sunset Boulevard , Hollywood, California.
1158 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
E. Merits of the Dispute
Section 10(k) of the Act requires the Board to make
an affirmative award of the disputed work after
giving due consideration to all relevant factors
involved. The following factors are relevant in
making a determination of the dispute before us.
1. Certifications and collective-bargaining
agreements
The I.A.T.S.E. was certified by the Board in 1956
as the exclusive bargaining representative of certain
employees, including stage managers, of KTLA,
which was then owned by Paramount Television
Productions, Inc., herein called Paramount. In 1957,
KTLA and the I.A.T.S.E. entered into their first
collective-bargaining agreement and have since
entered into successive agreements. The Employer, in
1964, acquired the assets and license of Paramount,
assumed the KTLA-I.A.T.S.E. collective-bargaining
agreement, retained all of the Paramount employees,
and continued to operate KTLA without interrup-
tion. Presently, all stage managers work interchange-
ably between KTLA and the Employer's Videotape
Division and are represented by I.A.T.S.E. under the
current KTLA-I.A.T.S.E. contract. The KTLA-
I.A.T.S.E. contract also provides that members of the
I.A.T.S.E. bargaining unit, including stage managers,
shall handle all productions within a radius of 500 air
miles of the Employer's lot and expressly sets forth
certain crewing requirements regarding stage manag-
ers on remote location productions.
The Guild has not been certified by the Board as
the collective-bargaining representative for a unit of
the Employer's employees. In 1970, however, the
Employer's subsidiary corporation, Golden West
Films, herein called films, entered into an agreement
with the Guild which later became the Tape
Supplement, containing a requirement that a Guild
stage manager be used. In April 1973, Films signed
the Guild's Tape Supplement, which the Guild
terminated as to Films on May 23, 1973.
While the Employer has no agreement with the
Guild requiring that Guild members be assigned
stage manager work, some producers who use the
Employer's. Videotape Division for "facilities rental"
on the Employer's lot or on remote locations are
signatory to the Guild Tape Supplement apparently
requiring them to use a Guild stage manager.
However, from at least 1961 until May 1973, when
those signatory producers used the Employer's
facilities, the Employer had a verbal waiver of the
Guild contract's requirement in that Guild stage
managers in such situations were not required to
wear headsets,3 the Guild furnishing a stage manag-
er, but only the I.A.T.S.E. stage manager wearing the
headset and actually functioning as stage manager.
This waiver was rescinded by the Guild in May 1973,
with the cancellation of its Tape Supplement agree-
ment with Films, thereby contributing to the earlier
jurisdictional dispute between the parties herein.
Based upon the above, we find that the Employer's
contract with I.A.T.S.E. covering stage managers and
the work in dispute favors an award thereof to
employees represented by that Union.
2. Employer's assignment and past practice
Pursuant to its contract with the I.A.T.S.E. and,
more recently, the Board's prior Decision and
Determination of Dispute, in productions by inde-
pendent producers who are signatories to the Guild
Tape Supplement, whether said productions were on
its lot or on remote locations, the Employer has
assigned the disputed work to an employee repre-
sented by the I.A.T.S.E. Such employee wears a
headset and functions as a stage manager.
The Employer has made this assignment of the
disputed work to the I.A.T.S.E. stage managers on all
such productions, on the lot and on remote location,
since 1959, except for a short time during which
I.A.T.S.E. relinquished jurisdiction over the disputed
work tasks under protest on a day-to-day basis in
order to avert a threatened Guild work stoppage.
Precedent thus favors assignment of the disputed
work to employees represented by I.A.T.S.E.
3. Relative skills, efficiency, and economy of
operations
The Employer strongly favors an award to its
employees represented by the I.A.T.S.E. for all
productions with the facilities and crews of the
Employer's Videotape Division because of their
experience in performing the disputed work and the
resulting efficiency and economy of operations.
The I.A.T.S.E. stage managers work interchange-
ably at the Videotape Division facilities and KTLA.
Each I.A.T.S.E. stage manager currently employed
by the Employer was originally a member of the
stage crew and is, therefore, thoroughly familiar with
the Employer's facilities, equipment, and other
employees of the Employer used in videotape
productions. The same equipment and crews are
used interchangeably on the lot and on remote
locations.
Further, the I.A.T.S.E. stage manager assists in
physically moving props, arranging lighting, and
3 Due to the electronic communication system utilized by the director in
videotaping, it is impossible to function as a stage manager without wearing
a headset.
DIRECTORS GUILD OF AMERICA, INC. 1159
painting sets. As the work tasks and skills required in
the performance of the stage managers' functions are
sir- ilar to and often identical with that performed by
other members of the technical crew, stagehands who
are also represented by the I.A.T.S.E. may perform
work normally performed by stage managers, and on
occasions stagehands are upgraded to stage manag-
ers and perform the same functions as permanent
stage managers.
The Guild stage manager, on the other hand, is not
a permanent employee of the Employer and is often
unfamiliar with the Employer's facilities, equipment,
and personnel. Additionally, the Guild stage manag-
er does not physically assist other members of the
technical crew in setting up the stage or performing
constructionlike functions. Nor does the Guild stage
manager possess the interchangeability with other
members of the stage crew as does the I.A.T.S.E.
stage manager.
The interchangeability of the I.A.T.S.E. stage
manager with the stage crew is even more important
on productions on remote locations because all the
equipment and cable to be used on remotes must be
installed before the taping, whereas on the lot much
of that equipment and cable have previously been
installed on a permanent basis. Further, unlike a
Guild stage manager, the I.A.T.S.E. stage manager is
involved from the beginning in the initial survey of
the location, in all production meetings, and in the
physical task of setting up the location.
Hence, greater efficiency of operations results with
only an I.A.T.S.E. stage manager on all productions
at the Employer's facilities, on remote locations as
well as at the Employer's iot,4, by the Employer and
by companies signatory to the Guild Tape Supple-
ment. We are, therefore, persuaded that the factors of
skill, experience, and efficiency and economy of
operations dictate the award of the work to the
Employer's own employees who are represented by
the I.A.T.S.E. on all productions at the Employer's
facilities whether on remote locations or on the
Employer's lot.
Conclusion
Upon the entire record in this proceeding and after
full consideration of all of the relevant factors, in
particular the Board's previous Decision and Deter-
mination of Dispute, the contractual relationship
between the Employer and the I.A.T.S.E., the
Employer's assignment of the work and past practice,
the skills and experience required, and the efficiency
and economy of operations, we conclude that the
4 As set forth in the Board's prior Decision and Determination of
Dispute, 210 NLRB 46, however, on productions by the film-oriented
producers signatory to the basic Guild film industry contract, where two
stage managers are required, the addition of a Guild stage manager, also
employees of the Employer who are represented by
the I .A.T.S.E. are entitled to perform the work in
question on all productions using the Employer's
facilities, whether produced by the Employer or by
independent producers contracting for the use of the
Employer's Videotape Division equipment and per-
sonnel , on the Employer's lot or on remote locations,
and we shall determine the dispute accordingly. In
making this determination , we award the work to the
employees of the Employer who are represented by
the I .A.T.S.E., but not to that labor organization or
its members. -
DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
Pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, and upon the basis of the
foregoing fmdings and the entire record in this
proceeding, the National Labor Relations Board
hereby makes the following Determination of Dis-
pute:
1. Employees employed by Golden West Broad-
casters and Golden West Videotape Division who
are represented by International Alliance of Theatri-
cal Stage Employees and Moving Picture Machine
Operators of the United States and Canada, AFL-
CIO, are entitled to perform the functions of stage
manager, including wearing the headset, on all
videotape productions produced by the Golden- West
Broadcasters or by independent producers contract-
ing for the use of Golden West Videotape Division
equipment and personnel on the Employer's lot or on
remote locations.
2. Directors Guild of America, Inc., is not
entitled by means proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D)
of the Act to force or require Golden West
Broadcasters and Golden West Videotape Division,
Los Angeles, California, or independent producers
on their productions using the facilities of the Golden
West Videotape Division, to assign the above work
to employees represented by Directors Guild of
America, Inc.
3. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision
and Determination of Dispute, Directors Guild of
America, Inc., shall notify the Regional Director for
Region 31, in writing, whether or not it will refrain
from forcing or requiring Golden West Broadcasters
and Golden West Videotape Division, or independ-
ent producers on their production at the Golden
West Videotape Division, by means proscribed by
Section 8(b)(4)(D), to assign the, work:in dispute in a
manner inconsistent with the above determination.
wearing a headset , greatly enhances the efficiency of operations. The
determination of dispute herein does not affect the Board's previous
determination as to such productions.