Local 4, Int'l Brotherhood of Electrical Workers

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 23, 1962

138 N.L.R.B. 239 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

LOCAL 4, INT'L BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS 239
and Prusinski to other duties. The incidents constituted (1) a strike, partial in nature,
by the Typographers, and (2) successful inducement and encouragement of em-
ployees to engage in a strike and concerted refusal to perform employment services;
the object being to force or require the Employer to assign camera and film develop-
ment work on the Brightype to the Typographers rather than to the Photoengravers.
Such conduct is violative of Section 8(b)(4)(D). The cases of N.L.R.B. v. Inter-
national Rice Milling Co., Inc., et al, 341 U.S. 665; and Joliet Contractors Asso-
ciation, et al. v. N.L.R.B., 202 F. 2d 606 (C.A. 7), cert. denied 346 U.S. 824, cited
by the Respondent, are inapposite The Joliet Contractors case did not involve a
strike or concerted refusal by employees to refuse to perform services in the course
of their employment (id. 609). The instant case does. In International Rice Milling
the respondent union did not engage in a strike against the employer of the employees
involved or encourage concerted action by them. Here it did both.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the Typogiaphers set forth above, occurring in connection with
the operations of Central Typesetting and Electrotyping Company, previously re-
fdrred to, have a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and com-
merce among the several States, and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and
obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent, Chicago Typographical Union No. 16, AFL-
CIO, has violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act, it will be recommended that it
cease and desist from such conduct and take certain affirmative action designed to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and the entire record in the case,
I make the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. Chicago Typographical Union No. 16, AFL-CIO, and Chicago Photoengravers
Union No 5, International Photoengravers Union of North America, are labor
organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
2. By engaging in a strike and by inducing and encouraging employees of Central
Typesetting and Electrotyping Company to engage in a strike or concerted refusal
in the course of their employment to perform services with an object of forcing or
requiring Central Typesetting and Electrotyping Co to assign the operation of the
camera and the film development work on the Brightype to the typographers rather
than to the photoengravers, the Typographers has engaged in and is engaging in
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(b) (4) (D) of the Act.
3 The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
Local No. 4 , International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL-CIO and Charles H. Norman , John Karoly and George
J. Moran, a partnership , d/b/a Tri-Cities Broadcasting Com-
pany. Case No. A0-39. August 23, 1962
ADVISORY OPINION
This is a petition filed by Local No. 4, International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, herein called the Petitioner or
Union, for an Advisory Opinion in conformity -with Sections 102.98
and 102.99 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended.
138 NLRB No. 37.
240 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Thereafter Charles H. Norman, John Karoly and George J. Moran,
a partnership, d/b/a Tri-Cities Broadcasting Company, herein
called the Employer or Primary Employer, filed an "Answer to the
Petition for Advisory Opinion."
A. In pertinent part, the petition alleges as follows :
1. The Petitioner, a labor organization within the meaning of the
Act, is a, party defendant in an injunction proceeding before the Equity
Division of the Circuit Court of Madison County, in Edwardsville,
Illinois, docketed as Case No. 62-C-300. Said injunction proceeding
was instituted on June 13, 1962, by the Employer who operates radio
station WGNU in Madison County, Illinois.
2. In the court proceeding, the Employer seeks to enjoin the Peti-
tioner and its members from (a) establishing a boycott or distributing
notices in order to injure the person, character, or business of the
Employer; (b) coercing and inducing the Employer's customers not
to do business with its radio station; (c) stating to the general public
that the Employer was employing nonunion employees; (d) inducing
any breach of contract between the Employer and its customers; and
(e) performing any unlawful act to prevent the Employer from
making or carrying out contracts or from continuing its business
in a lawful manner.
3. The complaint filed by the Employer alleges, inter alia, that (a)
the Petitioner had mailed false and malicious letters to the station's
advertisers with respect to an alleged labor dispute and to the station's
alleged nonunion status; (b) it has threatened and coerced the ad-
vertisers with "do not patronize" handbilling if they did not cease
doing business with the Employer; and (c) as a result of such coercive
and threatening letters, advertisers in Granite City, Illinois, and else-
where have withdrawn their advertising and have breached their ad-
vertising contracts with the Employer.
4. On June 19, 1962, the circuit judge of the Circuit Court of Madi-
son City, Illinois, issued a temporary injunction against the Petitioner
and others although it did not make any specific jurisdictional findings
of fact or conclusions of law.
5. On June 25, 1962, the Petitioner filed an appeal from the tem-
porary injunction of the Circuit Court to the Appellate Court of
Illinois, Fourth District.
6. The Petitioner contends that the injunction complaint alleges
activity on its part which is proscribed by Section 8 (b) (4) (A) and
(B) of the Act and that the Board would assert jurisdiction because
these activities of the Petitioner not only involve the Employer's radio
station but also secondary employers over whose operations the Board
has jurisdiction.
LOCAL 4, INT'L BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS 241
7. On December 1, 1961, the Employer commenced operation of
radio station WGNU in Madison County, Illinois. This station serv-
ices the general Tri-City, Illinois, area of Granite City, Madison, and
Venice, Illinois, and the surrounding territory. The Employer sells
radio time to advertisers and broadcasts music, news, and commercial
advertisements. During the 4 months of its operations up to and in-
cluding March 31, 1962, the Employer's total gross sale for advertising
time on radio station WGNU was less than $30,000.
8. On April 13, 1962, the Union filed a representation proceeding
with the Board's St. Louis Regional Office, docketed as Case No. 14-
RC-4302. Having been advised by the Regional Office representa-
tives that the Employer's current volume of business was not sufficient
to warrant the Board's assertion of jurisdiction over the Employer,
the Union withdrew its representation proceeding on April 26, 1962.
9. At the hearing in the injunction proceeding before the circuit
court judge, it was stipulated that the following named secondary em-
ployers, inter alia, were contacted and involved by the activity of the
Union and its members alleged in the complaint. Tri-City Grocery
Company operates a chain of retail grocery stores in Illinois and
Missouri and has its principal office at Granite City, Illinois. During
1961, its total sales were more than $500,000 and it made purchases of
goods from outside the State in excess of $50,000. Schlitz Brewing
Company is a wholesale distributor of beer and Mobil Gas Company
is a wholesale distributor of gasoline. Both these companies operate
in the Tri-City, Illinois, area and annually purchase goods in the
amount of $50,000 or more from outside the State of Illinois.
10. No other representation or unfair labor practice proceedings
are pending before the Board that involve either the Petitioner or the
Employer herein.
B. In pertinent part, the Employer's "Answer to the Petition for
Advisory Opinion" alleges as follows :
1. The Employer admits the allegations of the petition herein per-
taining to (a) the Petitioner's status as a labor organization; (b) the
filing and the withdrawal of representation proceedings in Case No.
14-RC-4302; (c) the injunction suit brought against the Petitioner
in the Circuit Court of Madison County, Illinois, and the amended
prayer for relief seeking to enjoin only "those acts which induced
breach of its written contracts with its advertisers"; and (d) the
breach of advertising contracts by four advertisers after they had
received letters and telephone calls from the Petitioner.
2. The Employer admits that it stipulated that the Petitioner had
written letters to advertiser, Tri-City Grocery, and to local Granite
City distributors of Schlitz Beer and Mobil Gas, but denies all other
242 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
allegations as to the stipulation. Further, the Employer does not
have knowledge as to the commerce data of Tri-City Grocery Com-
pany and denies generally all commerce data allegations with respect
to Schlitz Brewing Company and Mobil Gas Company.
3. The Employer contends that the Petitioner's activities in attempt-
ing to induce breaches of written contract by its advertisers (suc-
cessful in four instances) are neither protected nor prohibited under
the National Labor Relations Act and are therefore subject to the
jurisdiction of the Illinois State courts and governed by Illinois State
tort law.
On the basis of the above, the Board is of the opinion that:
1. The Employer operates radio station WGNU in Madison County,
Illinois, and services the Tri-City, Illinois, area of Granite City,
Madison, and Venice, Illinois, and the surrounding territory. The
Board's standard for exercising jurisdiction over enterprises engaged
in the operation of radio stations is a minimum gross volume of busi-
ness of $100,000 per annum. Raritan Valley Broadcasting Company,
Inc., 122 NLRB 90. On the facts submitted, the Employer's opera-
tions, projected on an annual basis, do not meet the Board's standard
for asserting jurisdiction over radio stations.
2. Secondary employer, Tri-City Grocery Company, is a retail
enterprise with its principal office in Granity City, Illinois. It does
a gross annual volume of business in excess of $500,000 and makes
annual purchases from outside of Missouri and Illinois of more than
$50,000. The Board's standard for exercising jurisdiction over a retail
enterprise which satisfies its statutory or legal jurisdiction is a gross
volume of business of at least $500,000 annually. Carolina Supplies
and Cement Co., 122 NLRB 88, 89. The out-of-State purchases, con-
stituting direct inflow under the Board's decision in Siemons Mailing
Serice, 122 NLRB 81, 85, bring Tri-City Grocery Company within the
Board's statutory or legal jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Board
would assert jurisdiction over Tri-City Grocery Company. Secondary
employers, Schlitz Brewing Company and Mobil Gas Company, are
wholesale distributors who annually purchase $50,000 or more from
outside of Illinois. The Board's standard for exercising jurisdiction
over a nonretail enterprise requires at least $50,000 inflow or outflow,
direct or indirect. Siemzons Mailing Service, supra. Accordingly,
the Board would assert jurisdiction over each of them.'
'As noted above, the Employer has not denied the commerce data pertaining to Tn-
City Grocery Company and has only generally done so with respect to the commerce data
of Schhtz Brewing Company and Mobil Gas Company In neither of these cases has the
Employer affirmatively offered or asserted countervailing allegations Under these circum-
stances , we have relied upon the jurisdictional facts alleged in the petition herein.
LOCAL 4, INT'L BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS 243
3. In cases involving secondary activity by a union which may be
violative of Section 8(b) (4) of the Act where, as here, the primary
employer's operations do not meet the Board's jurisdictional stand-
ards, the Board will take into consideration for jurisdictional pur-
poses not only the operations of the primary employer, but also the
entire operations of the secondary employers at the locations affected
by the alleged conduct involved 2 The dispute between the Petitioner
and the Primary Employer exists in the Tri-City area and the Peti-
tioner's activity with respect to the aforesaid three secondary em-
ployers occurred in this area. Tri-City, Illinois, area is thus the
location affected by the Petitioner's secondary activity conduct. As
indicated above, the Tri-City Grocery Company, Schlitz Brewing
Company, and Mobil Gas Company are Tri-City, Illinois, enterprises,
each of which meets the Board's jurisdictional standards and over
each of whom the Board would assert jurisdiction. Presumably, their
operations in this area alone, either singly or jointly, would warrant
the Board's assertion of jurisdiction.
In these circumstances and in accord with established Board prece-
dent, the Board would assert jurisdiction over the Primary Employer
and secondary employers affected by the Petitioner's activity whether
or not such activity is in fact violative of Section 8 (b) (4) of the Act.'
Accordingly, the parties are therefore advised, under Section
102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended,
that, on the facts here present, the commerce operations of the primary
Employer and those of the secondary employers at Tri-City, Illinois,
area, the location affected by the Petitioner's secondary conduct, are
such that the Board would assert jurisdiction with respect to labor
disputes cognizable under Sections 8 or 10 of the Act.
MEMBER RODGERS took no part in the consideration of the above
Advisory Opinion.
$ See B. W. Jemison and Frank Conwell , Partners, doing business as Jemcon Broadcast-in;
Company, 135 NLRB 362 and footnote 2 therein ; Terrizzi Beverage Company, 137
NLRB 495.
3 Madison Building & Construction Trades Council, et al. ( Wallace Hildebrandt & John
Kiefer, d/b/a H & K Lathing Co.), 134 NLRB 517, where the Board stated : "The re-
quirement that secondary employers be affected by the conduct involved does not mean
that a violation must first be found . It is sufficient that conduct occurred that involved
the secondary employer, which conduct must be considered and ruled upon as alleged
violations."
662353-63-vol. 138-17