Teamsters, Local Union No. 327

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 30, 1975

218 N.L.R.B. 1003 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

TEAMSTERS, LOCAL UNION NO. 327
Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Helpers & Taxi Cab Drivers,
Local Union No. 327 andRamsey Electric Co. and
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL-CIO, Local 429. Case 26-CD-111
June 30, 1975
DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF
DISPUTE
BY MEMBERS FANNING, KENNEDY, AND
PENELLO
This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, follow-
ing a charge filed by Ramsey Electric Co., herein-
after called the Employer, alleging a violation of
Section 8(b)(4)(D) by Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Help-
ers & Taxi Cab Drivers, Local Union No. 327,
hereinafter called Teamsters.
Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on February
19, 1975, at Nashville, Tennessee, before Hearing
Officer Keith A. Warren. All parties appearing at the
hearing, including International Brotherhood of
Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO, Local 429, hereinafter
called IBEW, were afforded full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to adduce evidence bearing on the issues. Thereafter,
the Employer filed a brief in support of its position,
which has been duly considered.
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 rulings of the Hearing
Officer made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error. The rulings are hereby
affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this proceeding the
Board makes the following findings:
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
The Employer is a Tennessee corporation with its
principal office located in Nashville, Tennessee,
engaged in the construction business as an electrical
contractor. During the past 12 months, the Employer
purchased and received at its Nashville, Tennessee,
location goods and services valued in excess of
$50,000 from points located directly outside the State
of Tennessee. During the same period of time, the
Employer's gross volume of business exceeded
$500,000. The parties stipulated and we find that the
Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act and it will
effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdic-
tion herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
1003
The parties stipulated, and we find, that the
Respondent Teamsters and the IBEW are labor
organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of
the Act.
III. THE DISPUTE
A. Background and Facts
On or about October 15, 1974, the Employer began
work pursuant to a subcontract with Flour Pioneer,
Inc., a subsidiary of Flour Corporation, to provide
the labor for the installation of the electrical
components at a-generating facility for the Tennessee
Valley Authority Steam Plant Site in Gallatin,
Tennessee. The TVA Steam Plant at Gallatin is a
large facility covering several hundred acres. The site
is located at the end of a peninsula which extends
into Old Hickory Lake. The new construction for
which the Employer is performing work is confined
to a fenced-in area approximately 300 by 200 yards
in dimension. The area wherein 90 to 95 percent of
the work is being performed is approximately the size
of two football fields. The Company maintains a job
office in a trailer approximately 200 feet from the
nearest unit being installed as part of the project.
Behind the office is a warehouse where electrical
materials are stored prior to their installation on the
project itself. Prefabrication work on materials which
are to be installed by the Company's employees is
done in a temporary fabrication shop located within
the Company's job trailers. Large materials are
stored in an open area surrounding the work area.
The Company utilizes two pickup trucks on the
jobsite itself to transport men and materials from the
small warehouse and fabrication area for installation
on the project. The only materials transported by the
pickup trucks are those which are supposed to be
used within a day's time, and the trucks are used for
the sole purpose of transporting men and materials at
the jobsite. The farthest point from the ware-
house/fabrication area to work actually being per-
formed is approximately 300 yards. The number of
trips which might be made in a pickup truck during
the course of the day varies according to the specific
work being performed and the needs of the employ-
ees to return to the fabrication area for preparation
of new or additional materials for installation. The
average amount of time that a pickup truck is used
during a course of the day is an hour or an hour, and
a half at most. When materials which are too large
for a pickup truck must be transported, a large truck
operated by the general contractor and driven by a
teamster is used. Ramsey Electric Co. has an
agreement with IBEW for the furnishing of men to
218 NLRB No. 131
1004 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
perform work for Ramsey Electric Co. on the Flour
Pioneer jobsite at Gallatin. In accordance with the
terms- of this agreement, Ramsey Electric assigned
the work of driving the pickup trucks on the jobsite
to its employees who are members of and who are
represented by IBEW. Ramsey has no contract with
the Teamsters.
On or about November 20, 1974, Respondent's
assistant business agent, John Harris, telephoned
Steven Harlan, president of the Employer, and told
Harlan that Respondent needed to put one of
Respondent's men on one of Ramsey Electric Co.'s
pickup trucks. Harlan replied that under the terms of
the Employer's agreement with IBEW the work
claimed belonged to the IBEW; whereupon Harris
told Harlan that the work belonged to Respondent
rather than the IBEW. Prior to Christmas 1974
Respondent's business agent approached Bill Ar-
nold, the general superintendent of Flour Pioneer at
the jobsite, and told Arnold that Flour Pioneer
would have to stop electricians from hauling materi-
als on the jobsite. Arnold replied that the dispute
between Respondent and the IBEW over assignment
of work had been going on for some time and that
Harris should not expect Arnold to resolve the
dispute that the parties had been unable to resolve
among themselves. During the latter part of Decem-
ber, Harris told Arnold that if Arnold could not stop
the electricians from hauling materials that he
(Harris) would do so. Just prior to Christmas Harris
met with Harlan on the jobsite and told Harlan that
Respondent and IBEW were parties to an agreement
which gave drivers' work to Respondent. Harris then
showed Harlan a copy of the agreement to which he
referred. Harlan read the copy shown to him by
Harris and told Harris that he disagreed with
Respondent's interpretation of the agreement and
that the work would remain with the electricians.
Commencing on or about January 8, 1975, Re-
spondent began picketing the Flour Pioneer jobsite
with picket signs which read: "Ramsey Electric
unfair-Teamsters 327." On January 10, Respondent
President Ellis and Assistant Business Agent Harris,
Flour Pioneer Superintendent Arnold, Ramsey Elec-
tric President Harlan, and IBEW Representative
Byron Minter met at the jobsite. At, this meeting
Respondent's representatives renewed their demands
on behalf of Respondent; Harlan on behalf of the
Employer maintained that the drivers' work should
remain with his employees who were members of
IBEW.
The picketing continued until on or about January
14, and thereafter, at the insistence of Respondent,
Ramsey Electric agreed to restrict the driving of
i On the basis of the record , it does not appear that the parties herein
Ramsey Electric trucks on the jobsite to one delivery
of materials per day from the warehouse to the area
where the work was being performed, a distance of
up to 300 yards. This arrangement continued for
approximately 2 weeks and then ceased. At the time
of the hearing the one delivery of materials per day
arrangement was no longer in effect and the
Employer's employees were driving the pickup trucks
as needed. During the time that picketing by
Respondent was in progress, employees of Flour
Pioneer ceased to work and refused to perform
services for their employer at the jobsite. The
employees of Ramsey Electric Co. crossed the picket
line and did continue to work during this period of
time.
B. The Work in Dispute
The work in dispute is limited to the driving of the
Employer's pickup trucks in which miscellaneous
tools, electrical equipment and materials, and electri-
cians are transported between the jobsite warehouse
and various work locations within the jobsite
location.
C. Contentions of the Parties
The Employer contends that the work in dispute is
correctly assigned to its own employees who are
members of IBEW, the labor organization with
which it has a collective -bargaining agreement. The
IBEW contends that the work is correctly assigned to
its members . The Respondent Union contends that
the work is of the nature that is normally and
traditionally performed by its members and that the
Employer should therefore hire individuals who are
represented by the Respondent to perform such
work.
D. Applicability of the Statute
Before the Board may proceed with a determina-
tion of a 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.' As noted
above, the record discloses that Respondent de-
manded that the work be assigned to Teamsters
members; that Respondent's representative told
General Superintendent Arnold that if Arnold could
not stop the electricians from hauling materials that
he (Harris) would do it; and that the Respondent in
fact picketed the jobsite from on or about January 8
until January 14, 1975. There can be no doubt that
the major goal behind Respondent's statements and
have agreed upon a method for the settlement of the instant dispute
TEAMSTERS, LOCAL UNION NO. 327
the picketing was to have the disputed work assigned
to members of Respondent. Therefore, on the record
as a whole, we are satisfied that, there is reasonable
cause to believe that a violation of Section 8(b)(4)(D)
has occurred and that the dispute is properly, before
the Board for determination.
E. Merits of the Dispute
Section 10(k) of the Act requires the Board to make
an affirmative award of disputed work after giving
due consideration to the various relevant factors.
1. Collective-bargaining agreements
The Employer relies in part on the current
collective-bargaining agreement between it and
IBEW, which provides in pertinent part that "all
materials, equipment and vehicles will be handled
and operated by personnel classified in this agree-
ment ." The Employer is not party to a collective-
bargaining agreement with the Respondent Team-
sters . However, the Employer also relies in part on an
agreement between the Teamsters and the IBEW
called the "Green Book" signed February 11, 1942,
and entitled "Plan for Settling Jurisdictional Dis-
putes Nationally and Locally, Approved by the
Building and Construction Trades Department,
AFL-CIO." The language in that agreement relied
on by the Employer reads, "the operators of vehicles
used for electrical construction work, maintenance
work or electrical repair work-that is, when such
vehicles are used for transporting man or men
and/or material to and from job, and said vehicle
remains at job site with man or men in the
performance of electrical work, and the operation of
the vehicle is an integral part of the work-such
operator comes under the jurisdiction of the Interna-
tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers." The
IBEW's position is consistent with that of the
Employer and it, likewise , cites the two agreements
discussed above.
The Respondent Teamsters also cites the Green
Book noted above , relying on language which states,
"It is understood and agreed that the equipment
operated by electrical workers shall only be the truck
carrying the line and maintenance crews, tools, etc.,
to and from the job, or the emergency car for
electrical contracting shops carrying only tools and
repair equipment for emergency work . Operation of
all delivery equipment for the delivery of materials of
all character, such as poles, pipes , transformers,
cables, and electrical appliances, such as refrigera-
tors, radios, etc., shall be the jurisdiction of the
International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen and Helpers."
1005
2. Employer and area practice
The record shows that this Employer, as well A as
other electrical contractors in the area , continues to'
use electricians to drive pickup trucks for purpose's'
corresponding to the work in dispute here, and that
this accords with past practice going back some 30
years. There is no indication that teamsters have
been utilized to drive pickup trucks for the type of
work presently in dispute, although there was
evidence which indicates that electrical contractors
have utilized employees represented by the Team-,
sters to drive trucks with a load capacity larger than
that of pickup trucks. The record also indicates that
Respondent Local has previously acquiesced in the
IBEW's performing the type of work in dispute here
at other jobsites in the area.
3. Efficiency and economy of operations
The Employer contends that the work in dispute
can be performed more economically by using its
own employees rather than members of Respondent
Union. The record indicates that the pickup trucks
are used for a maximum of approximately 1 to 1- 1/2
hours' running time per day, and the Employer
contends that hiring new employees who would be,
members of Respondent Union would be an addi-
tional and prohibitive cost. In addition, it is clear
that the Employer's employees who are represented'
by the IBEW possess the everyday skills required to
drive the pickup trucks , as well as the skills required
for the performance of their primary duties.
Conclusions
Having considered the pertinent factors herein, we
conclude that employees who are represented by the
IBEW are entitled to perform the work in dispute.
This assignment is consistent with the Employer's
initial assignment , the Employer's contract with the
IBEW, the past and current practice in this area by
both this Employer and others, and efficiency and
economy of operation . In making this determination,
we are awarding the work in question to employees
employed by the Employer who are represented by
the IBEW, but not to that Union or its members. The
present determination is limited to the particular
controversy which gave rise to this proceeding.
DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
Pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National Labor;
Relations Act, as amended , and upon the basis of the
foregoing findings and the entire record in this
proceeding , the National Labor Relations Board
makes the following Determination of Dispute:
1006 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
1. Employees of the Ramsey Electric Co. who are
currently represented by International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO , Local 429, are
entitled to perform the work of driving pickup trucks
in which miscellaneous tools , electrical equipment
and materials , and electricians are transported.
2. Teamsters, Chauffeurs , Helpers & Taxi Cab
Drivers, Local Union No. 327 , is not entitled by
means proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(D ) of the Act to
force or require Ramsey Electric Co. to assign the
above work to employees represented by the Team-
sters.
3. Within 10 days from the date of this Decision
and Determination of Dispute , Teamsters , Chauf-
feurs, Helpers & Taxi Cab Drivers , Local Union No.
327, shall notify the Regional Director for Region 26,
in writing, whether or not it will refrain from forcing
or requiring Ramsey Electric Co., by means pro-
scribed by Section 8 (b)(4)(D) of the Act, to assign the
work in dispute to employees represented by it rather
than to employees represented by International
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers , AFL-CIO, Local
429.