Inter-City Contractors Service, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 22, 1970

182 N.L.R.B. 684 (N.L.R.B. 1970)

684 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Inter-City Contractors Service, Inc. and Local 123, United
Construction Trades, affiliated with Allied Workers
International Union, Independent , Petitioner. Case
13-RC-12008
May 22, 1970
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS FANNING
AND JENKINS ' `
The Employer is an Indiana corporation engaged in
the construction industry in that state . In January 1969,
for the purpose of providing employment and training
to disadvantaged persons , the Employer received a grant
of $735 ,500 from the Manpower Commission of the
U.S. Department of Labor . These funds are currently
being applied for the stated purposes through the Jour-
neyman Employment and Training (JET) program, which
is administered under the joint auspices of the Employer
and the Intervenor unions. The Employer is also the
recipient of a contract for $101 ,000 for demolition work
from the Gary Development Commission , the funds
for which work are also of federal origin.
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended , a hearing
was held before Hearing Officer Cyrus A. Alexander.
Following the hearing and pursuant to Section 102.67
of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula-
tions and Statements of Procedure , Series 8 , as amended,
by order of the Regional Director for Region 13, this
case was transferred to the National Labor Relations
Board for decision . Thereafter , briefs were filed by
the Petitioner and the Employer and Intervenor unions.'
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 con-
nection with this case 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 . The rulings are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board finds:
The Petitioner filed its petition on October 16, 1969,
seeking to represent a unit of skilled craftsmen and
laborers of the Employer . Subsequently, on October
31, 1969 , Petitioner amended its petition to request a
unit of only laborers of the Employer. At the hearing,
Petitioner again amended its petition to request a unit
of only "orientation -observation" employees of the
Employer . In its brief, the Petitioner now states that
it "will participate in any election in whatever unit
the Board finds appropriate."
While Petitioner has thus been less than specific about
which unit of employees it seeks to represent , we shall
focus on the "orientation observation " employees ,- since
it appears that they are the only ones not currently
represented by another labor organization . We say this
because, on August 6, 1969 , the Employer and the
Northwestern Indiana Building and Construction Trades
Council signed the Building Trades Agreement, which
is currently in effect and binds the Employer to recognize
the Council and the affiliated unions of the Council
as the bargaining representatives for the employees in
each of their respective occupational jurisdictions. It
is clear, then , that a contract bar exists as to all employ-
ees except the "orientation -observation" employees,
whom the Intervenors do not purport to represent.
I The Intervenor unions, Northwestern Indiana Building and Construct
tion Trades Council and its affilia ted union , Local 81, Laborers, also
affiliated with Laborers International Union of North America, AFL-
CIO, intervened at the hearing
For the purpose of finding and preparing suitable
applicants for the JET program , the Employer has under-
taken a preliminary program in which it selects hard
core unemployed for a brief period of observation and
orientation . The orientation-observation group of
employees are primarily engaged in running errands
and performing cleanup chores in demolition work per-
formed by the Employer under its contract with the
Gary Development Commission . If these employees,
initially certified as "hard core " unemployed ,2 exhibit
work habits which, in the Employer ' s opinion , will make
them productive , they are transferred from the orienta-
tion-observation group into construction laborer and craft
trainee positions under the JET program, and may even-
tually become journeymen . There are now ten such
orientation -observation employees , who, under the pro-
gram , are provided with supportive medical and psycho-
logical services. They are paid $3 per hour, do not
receive any fringe benefits , and are provided with hand
tools by the Employer , if such tools are necessary
in the demolition work . About 50 such orientation-obser-
vation employees have been hired since March 1969.
The average stay of such employees in this group is
2 weeks to a month. These employees are separately
supervised and work away from the construction project.
The Employer has indicated that it will terminate the
orientation-observation program upon the expiration of
its contract with the Manpower Commission on January
17, 1971.
The Petitioner contends that these employees have
a right , during their orientation-observation period, to
be represented by a bargaining agent of their own choos-
ing under the Act. The Employer and Intervenors con-
tend that the "hard core " personnel , during the period
of from 2 weeks to a month spent in orientation and
observation for the purpose of instilling work habits
and determining whether they are capable of moving
into one of several already established bargaining units,
may not properly "be molded together" into an
appropriate bargaining unit . Their ground for so contend-
ing is that the tenure of employment of these employees
is too temporary and transitory.
We agree with the Employer and the Intervenors.
The tenure of employment as orientation -observation
2 Persons who are members of minority groups, underemployed,
undereducated , and who have earned less than a certain amount in
the past, are certified as "hard core "
182 NLRB No. 108
INTER CITY CONTRACTORS SERVICE, INC
employees is only for 2 weeks to a month, and if
the employees successfully complete this period of train-
ing, they are assigned as trainee laborers or craft trainees
on construction projects where they become members
of units which are covered by bargaining agreements
While these employees , during the observation-orienta-
tion period , do perform some work , their special status
and the brief tenure of their employment in this phase
of the program make it questionable whether a collective-
bargaining relationship would be feasible and would
serve any purpose Because of the temporary and transi-
tory nature of the employment during their orientation-
685
observation period , a bargaining unit of such employees
during this period would be necessarily unstable and
impracticable Under all the circumstances of this case,
we conclude that it would not effectuate the policies
of the Act to find that the proposed bargaining unit
would be appropriate Accordingly, we shall dismiss
the petition
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition herein be, and
it hereby is, dismissed