United Brotherhood of Carpenters

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 15, 1973

206 N.L.R.B. 416 (N.L.R.B. 1973)

416 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
United Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of Ameri-
ca, Local 772, AFL-CIO, and Gilbert F. Luett-
Individually and as business representative for said
labor organization ; Laborers International Union of
North America , AFL-CIO, Local 244, and Roy C.
Eversoll-Individually and as business representa-
tive for said labor organization ; Bridge, Structural &
Ornamental Ironworkers, Tri-City Local 111 (Rock
Island, Ill.), and William Weaver-Individually and
as business representative for said labor organiza-
tion ; International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America,
Local 371 (Rock Island, Ill.), and John Thorp-Indi-
vidually and as business representative for said labor
organization ; Charles Franks, Arnie Dann, Ray
Hood, Ronald Miller and Patrick Bark-Individu-
ally and as representing all the persons composing
the class of various labor organizations to which they
are affiliated; Plumber & Steamfitters Union, Local
387, and Gene Ruefer-Individually and as business
representative for said labor organization, and James
Meador-Individually and as business representa-
tive for said labor organization and being affiliated
therewith ; International Union of Operating Engi-
neers, Local 537-(Rock Island, Ill.), and Donald
Kenney, Individually and as President of said labor
organization, and Edward Younger-Individually
and as business representative for said labor organi-
zation and Witt Mechanical Contractors, Inc. Case
AO-150
October 15, 1973
ADVISORY OPINION
CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS FANNING,
KENNEDY, AND PENELLO
This is a petition filed on July 12, 1973, by United
Brotherhood of Carpenters & Joiners of America, Lo-
cal 772, AFL-CIO, et al., herein called the Petitioners,
for an Advisory Opinion in conformity with Section
102.98 and 102.99 of the National Labor Relations
Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended,
to determine whether the Board would assert jurisdic-
tion.
In pertinent part, the petition alleges as follows:
1. The District Court of the State of Iowa, in and
for Clinton County, herein called the State Court,
issued an injunction, Docket No. 20961, enjoining the
Petitioners from picketing a jobsite where Witt Me-
chanical Contractors, Inc., herein called the Employ-
er, was constructing a sewer treatment plant for the
city of Camanche, Iowa. The state court stated in its
ruling that it was laboring under the impression that
it had jurisdiction in the absence of action on the part
of the National Labor Relations Board in this matter.
2. The general nature of the Employer's business is
basically the construction of water and sewer plants.
It is incorporated in the State of Iowa and its business
is located in Davenport, Iowa. The petition sets forth,
inter alia, that from October 7, 1971, to July 21, 1972,
the Employer had a sewer treatment plant job at
Rushville, Illinois, the cost of which was $380,450.
The Petitioners contend that this would be a direct
outflow of services from Iowa and inflow to Illinois
resulting from interstate commerce. In addition, the
Petitioners allege that the Employer's sewer treatment
plant job at Camanche, Iowa, where the subject con-
troversy arose, was awarded to the Employer on Au-
gust 10, 1972, at a cost of $490,000; that certain
equipment used on the job came from the State of
Illinois, at a cost of $19,750, and from the State of
Nebraska, at a cost of $4,372; that steel was pur-
chased in Iowa at a cost of $8,000, and concrete and
cast iron pipe were also purchased in Iowa; but the
Petitioners allege that there are no steel mills in the
State of Iowa; and that the services of a fill-driving
contractor, from Kansas City, Missouri, cost $17,000.
3. The state court has made no findings with re-
spect to the aforesaid commerce data.
4. No representation or unfair labor practice pro-
ceedings involving the same labor dispute is pending
before the Board.
5. Although served with a copy of the Petition for
Advisory Opinion, no response as provided by the
Board's Rules and Regulations has been filed by any
party.
On the basis of the above, the Board is of the opin-
ion that:
1. The Employer is engaged in a nonretail enter-
prise constructing water and sewer plants.
2. The current standard for the assertion of juris-
diction over nonretail enterprises is an annual inflow
or outflow, direct or indirect, across state lines, of
$50,000. (Siemons Mailing Service, 122 NLRB 81, 85.)
As indicated above, the Petitioners allege interstate
commerce data, such as direct or indirect out-of-state
inflow of goods or services amounting to a total of
$49,122 at the Employer's Camanche, Iowa, job. The
Petitioners further allege that the Employer was
awarded a construction contract in Rushville, Illinois,
the cost of which was $380,450, and contend, in sub-
stance, that this should be deemed either direct out-
flow or inflow resulting from interstate commerce.
While we are unable to find, based on the facts al-
leged, that the full cost of such project can be so
categorized, in view of the nature of the project, it is
reasonable to assume that a portion of such contract
would necessarily include sufficient inflow which,
206 NLRB No. 96
UNITED BROTHERHOOD OF CARPENTERS 417
when considered in conjunction with the $49,122 in- 102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series
flow of the Iowa job, exceeds the $50,000 standard 8, as amended, that, on the allegations herein, the
and is sufficient to bring the Employer's operations Board would assert jurisdiction over the Employer's
within the Board's jurisdictional standards. operations with respect to labor disputes cognizable
Accordingly, the parties are advised under Section under Sections 8, 9, and 10 of the Act: