IBEW Local 26, 261 (1972)

Docket Number:05-CD-00169
 
FREE EXCERPT

IBEW LOCAL 26 261

International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local No. 26, AFL-CIO and Taylor Woodrow Blitman Construction Corporation and Electric Utility Employees Union. Cases 5-CD-169, 5-CD-170, 5CD-171, and 5-CD-173

January 31, 1972 DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF

DISPUTE

BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS FANNING

AND JENKINS

Pepco is a public utility company engaged in the supply and installation of various classes of electrical service and power to customers in the Greater Washington metropolitan area. It is incorporated in the District of Columbia and the Commonwealth of Virginia, and it annually does a gross volume of business in excess of $250,000.

Taylor and Pepco concede, and we find, that they are each an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act, and that it will effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.

  1. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS This is a proceeding under Section 10(k) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, following charges filed by Taylor Woodrow Blitman Construction Corporation (herein referred to as Taylor) and Electric Utility Employees Union (herein referred to as EUEU), alleging that Respondent, International Brotherhood of Electric Workers, Local 26, AFL-CIO (herein referred to as Local 26) has violated Section 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act by engaging in certain proscribed activity with an object of forcing or requiring the assignment of certain work described below to employees represented by Local 26 rather than to employees of Potomac Electric Power Company (herein referred to as Pepco). A hearing was held before Hearing Officer John L. Kluttz on October 28, 1971. All parties' appeared at the hearing and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to adduce evidence bearing on the issues.

    EUEU and Pepco filed briefs in support of their positions and they have 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 made by the Hearing Officer 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:

    1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYERS Taylor is a Delaware corporation having its principal office in New York, New York, and is engaged in the construction of a shopping mall in the city of Rockville,

    Maryland. In the course of its operation at Rockville,

    Maryland, Taylor annually receives goods and materials directly from outside the State of Maryland valued in excess of $50,000.

    ' Pepco was permitted to intervene at the hearing.

    195 NLRB No. 39

    We find that EUEU and Local 26 are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.

  2. THE DISPUTE A. The Work in Dispute The disputed work involves the installation of transformers and the extending of primary feeders to service termination facilities at sites selected by the customer either within or outside the customer 's building.

    1. Background Pepco supplies electrical power to customers in the District of Columbia and in certain areas in nearby Maryland and Virginia. Part of the service provided by Pepco includes the installation of cables, transformers, and related equipment and the connection thereof to equipment owned by the customer. Prior to 1967,

      Pepco customarily installed the equipment in vaults located outside the customer's building. The installation work was performed by Pepco's cable pullers and cable splicers, represented by EUEU.

      In 1967, Pepco began providing 'rooftop' installation service by which the same...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP