# Amicus Curiae Brief — NLRB v. Plasterers > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386413_0362%3A11 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Amicus Curiae Brief - **Published:** January 1, 1971 - **Citation:** 404 U.S. 116 ## Text 4 . i INDEX Interest ‘of the Anioas ee een eee QU ary aac eeccccceeeeccssseeescesseeeessssseesssesseesesessseee _—— Description.of the ‘‘Plan for Settling Jurisdic ional _ Disputes Nationally and Locally’? 2. ; Historical Development ................... . ‘ The Current Plan-—General Statement ............. Operation of the Plan Regardless of Whether the Particular Employer Affected by the Dis- pute is Bound Thereto 2.2... cecceecceeenees = Obligations Imposed Upon -Affiliated eters J - and Construction Trades Unions ......)...00000......: | The Joint Board, Appeals Boar id Peace s Panels ee ee EOE OOO EEO EERE ROOT TERR OOO EERE EEE REESE Eee The Appeals Board .......... Sepstpevactses eens eons Hearings Panels .................. fee oaskeceeproniveasaeavene Standards for Work Jurisdiction Under the BID esccasececenesnee sesten pavers actunentfansdgivestnasctesseepernevieessens Accomplishments of the og S61 een Difficulties Caused by NLRB Interpretation of Section 10(k) | Conclusion ....:.................cce-ceceeccnsceccccenccceceecccceccccecececescceece Appendix A (Members of the ‘Signatories to the | og 1) ae a a a Appendix B (The Plan—‘‘Green. Book’’) ..2............ Appendix C (Rules. and Beseiations: Under the . Plan—‘‘Blue BROOK) co vocegesucvensieranvissceenssesstasonvensnopilass OOOO OOOO OEE HOH OEE EOE EEE ERE EOE EEE EH EES AUTHORITIES CITED © ‘Cases Lathers v. Dunlop, C.A. No. 1221-66 (D.D.C. 1967), aff’d per curiam, 382 F. 2d 176 (D.C. Cir. 1967),. cert. denied, 389 U.S. 971 ...2....2-2....e20- miaaescentaecee . ~—— / / ‘i | Pace NERB v. Radi wa Television Broadcast Engineers Union « BS’’), 364 U.S. 573 . 5 Union Documents . Constitution of the Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO | . - Article IT Dy) Article VII, Sec. 2 3 . See Be 2 eee 6 Reports of Proceedings of Conventions of the Build- ing and Construction Trades Department. _ Fifty-Fifth Convention (1969) ..... 3 Special Convention (1957) ................ 6 *: Forty-Eighth Convention (1955) —......0..2.0.... oa 6 = erty Raret Convention (1948) ...........2.2...--: 6 Misialioneons | Dunlop, ‘‘ Jurtsdictional Disputes 2d Annual Conference on Labor 477 (1949) — 5 - Dunlop Letter, 40 LRRM 18 (1957) secsweeeeee 25, 26 Haber and Levinson, Labor Relations and Produc- tivity in the Building Trades, 234 (1960) ............ 5 Rains, ‘‘Jurisdictional-Dispute Settlements in the Building Trades,’’ 8 Lab. L.J. 385 (1957) -........... 5 - Strand, Kenneth T., Jurisdictional Disputes in Con- struction: the Causes, the Joint Board, and the , NLRB (1961) | 5, 24, 26 Statement by Secretary of Labor George P. Shultz . -(USDL,11-150, April 7, 1970) ..... 7 Reports of the Appeals Board, February 1968 - February 1971 ..... | 24 | IN THE a Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1970 No. 1184 Nationa Lasor Retations Boarp, Petitioner, Vv. Puasterers’ Locat Unton No. 79, OPERATIVE PLasTERERS’ AND CEMENT Masons’ INTERNATIONAL Association, AFL-CIO, et al. No. 1231 Texas Stare Tr & Terrazzo Co., Inc., Martini Tr & Terrazzo Co., Tz Conrractors - ASSOCIATION oF AMERICA, Inc., Petitioners, Vv. Piasterers’ Loca Union No. 79, OPERATIVE _Pasrerers’ anp CEMENT Masons’ INTERNATIONAL | ASSOCIATION, AFL-CIO, et al. ___ON WRITS OF CERTIORARI TO THE __ UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT BRIEF FOR BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION TRADES DEPARTMENT, AFL-CIO, AMICUS CURIAE INTEREST OF THE AMICUS This brief is submitted pursuant to Rule 42(2) of the Rules of this Court in support of the position of the Respondents in these cases, urging affirmance of the. deci- sion by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The written consent of all parties to these cases for the filing of this brief has been secured. These cases arise out of a jurisdictional dispute between Plasterers’ Local Union No. 79 and Tile Setters Local Union No. 20 which are affiliated with the Operative Plasterers and Cement Masons International Association (Plasterers) and the Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers’ International . Union of America (Bricklayers), respectively. The Build- ing and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO (here- inafter, ‘‘Department’’) was established in 1908 .and is composed of the seventeen National and International Union affiliates of the AFL-CIO which represent employees — in the building. and construction industry, including the - Plasterers and Bricklayers International Unions, and the Laborers’ International Union of North America which . s filed a brief, amicus curiae, in this Court. (The seven- teen affiliates of the Department. are listed in Appendix A hereto.) The Department’s affiliates represent more than three million employees in the industry. Among the De- partment’s ‘‘objects and principles,’’ as stated in Article II of its Constitution, are the following: ‘¢(6) To secure the adjustment of trade and juris- ; dictional disputes in the building and’ construction trades industry along practical lines as they may arise from time to time; and such decisions to be final and binding on all affiliated National and International Unions and their affiliated Local Unions. * * * _4£°(8) To promote industrial peace and develop a more harmonious feeling between employers and em- ployees. **(10) . ... to protect and advance the interests of the building and construction trades industry. * * * al ¥ ‘““(11) To engage in... legal . . . activities appro- priate for the advancement of the interests of affili- ated unions and their members in the building and construction industry ’ oO Jurisdictional disputes between building trades unions have long been a major problem in the construction indus- try, affecting unions and the employees they represent, employers and the public. In 1948, the Department duly adopted the ‘‘Plan: for Settling Jurisdictional Disputes Nationally and Locally’’ (hereinafter, “‘Plan’’) as the - method by which jurisdictional disputes between or among its affiliated National and International Unions or their affiliated ‘local unions should be ‘resolved. The Plan, as revised, continues in effect today. But its effectiveness, which is essential to the maintenance of industrial peace in the building and construction industry, has long been threatened by the position of the NLRB. in its interpreta- . tion of Section 10(k) of the Act. It is the Department’s considered belief that the decision by the court below, if affirmed by this Court, will strengthen the Plan and thus help to stabilize labor relations in the building and con- struction industry.’ . | SUMMARY This brief discusses the Operations of the Plan for Settling Jurisdictional Disputes Nationally and Locally and administrative considerations in connéction therewith. The legal arguments for the entire labor movement, in- ment Constitution, Art. VII, Sec. 2). This resolution was approved by the Convention of the Department in September, 1969. (Report of Pro- ceedings of the y-Fifth Convention of the Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO (1969), pp. 92, 296-298.) FEILER ROG PE ITO TIER LEH Ha ery ane " APPR RA SEER IHOy ore y . . OPAL IED! Bm IN Hy Cg SHG AL BS SCMBOED RAEI! Pind PIO BBO we cluding the Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO; are presented in the brief, amicus curiae, filed by the AFL-CIO in SHEpOr of the decision by the court below. The Plan, which was established in 1948, is binding on all seventeen affiliates of the Building and Construction Trades Department and through’ them on three million organized building and construction tradesmen. The Plan is operative as between unions regardless of whether or not the employer in question is stipulated to the Plan. It _ serves as a tripartite arbitration award mechanism binding on the employer, when the employer is stipulated to the Plan. All three tribunals which are part of this Plan, i.e., the: National Joint Board, the Appeals Board and the Hear- ings Panels, are established on a tripartite basis: public, labor and industry members. The procedure has been recognized by the National Labor Relations Board as a method for voluntary adjustment under Section 10(k) of the Act. The Plan has resulted in the elimination of many work stoppages and other impediments to job progress by pre- venting jurisdictional disputes from arising and, where they do arise, by deciding them in short order. The aver- age length of time for such decision is two weeks. In con- trast, the median time for decision by the NLRB under Section 10(k) in fiscal year 1970 was 230 days. A continued threat to the effectiveness of this mechanism which ‘has served the industry for more than twenty-three years is the competitive aspect of the NLRB as a tribunal available for forum shoppers. This results from the NLRB’s interpretation. of the term ‘‘parties to the dis- pute’’ in Section 10(k) (rejected by the court below) as authorizing a governmental determination of the juris- dictional dispute when the employer is not stipulated to the Plan. +) DESCRIPTION OF THE “PLAN FOR SETTLING . JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES NATIONALLY AND LOCALLY” Historical Development Beginning with the formation in 1897 of the National Building Trades Council, the forerunner to the present Building and Construction Trades Department of the AFL- CIO, many attempts were made within the structure of the building trades unions to settle privately jurisdictional] disputes.? In 1919, the National Board for Jurisdictional Awards was established by the Department. This was the first national joint body composed of representatives of construction unions and employer groups.? After this Board failed, several other methods were later tried in- cluding a Referee System with referees chosen variously from management or labor.* As the Supreme Court stated - in NLRB v. Radio and Television Broadcast Engineers Union (‘‘CBS’’), 364 U.S. 573,580 (1961), ‘‘Each of these efforts [in the construction and other industries] had helped some but none had achieved complete success. The result was a continuing and widely expressed dissatisfac- tion with jurisdictional disputes. ’’ Prior to the passage of the Labor Management Relations Act in 1947, the Department commenced negotiations to establish new private machinery for the settlement of juris- dictional disputes in the building and construction indus-. try. The ‘‘Plan for Settling Jurisdictional Disputes Na- tionally and Locally’’ became effective on May 1, 1948. *See Dunlop, “Jurisdictional Disputes,” NYU 2d Annual Conference on Labor 477, 494 ( 1969); Haber and Levinson, Labor Relations and Productivity in the Building Trades, 234 (1960) ; Rains, “Jurisdictional- Dispute Settlements in the Building Trades,” 8 Lab. L. J. 885 (1957); the Joint Board, and the NLRB, 61 (1961) (hereinafter, ‘Strand). * Strand, supra note 1, at 64. * Id: at 67, 68. See also Dunlop, supra note 1, at 494-95. 6 (Report of Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Con- ' vention of the Building and Construction Trades Depart- PPE EAN Rt RO te ment, AFL (1948), p. 117.) It was an agreement at two levels. First, it was the procedure adopted by the Depart- ment on behalf of its affiliated National and International Unions by which jurisdictional disputes between or among them or their affiliated local unions should be resolved. Second, it was an agreement among the Department, the Associated General Contractors of America, and seven national specialty contractors associations. 7 The Plan was included in the Constitution of the Depart- ment, in 1948, as Section 37. (Report of Proceedings of the Forty-First Annual Convention of the Building and Con- struction Trades Department, AFL (1948), pp. 15-19.) In 1955, Section 37 of the Department Constitution was amended to read as follows: ‘“‘Such Plan for the Settlement of J utisdictional Dis- putes recognized by the Building and Construction ' Trades Department shall be recognized by and binding on all affiliates.’’ (Report of Proceedings of the Forty-Eighth Annual Con- vention of the Building and Construction Trades Depart- ~ment, AFL (1955), pp. 21, 191-194.) Since 1957, when a new Department Constitution was adopted (Report of Proceedings of the Special Convention of the Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO (1957), pp. 42-55), Article X of the Department Constitution has provided: ‘“ All jurisdictional disputes between or - among affili- ated National and International Unions and their affili- ated Local. Unions and employers shall be settled and adjusted according to the present plan established by - the Building and Construction Trades Department, or any other plan or method of procedure adopted in the future by fhe Department for the settlement of jurisdictional disputes. Said present plan or any other plan adopted in the future shall be recognized as final ee ee 7 . and binding upon the Department and upon all affili- ated National or International Unions and their affili- ated Local Unions. ”’ | The Plan has been reviewed and revised from time to time since its inception in 1948 and, with some change in sponsoring employer organizations, hag been functioning during the past twenty-three years in the prevention and settlement of jurisdictional disputes in the building and construction industry. The Plan is contained in a book commonly and hereafter referred to as the ‘‘Green Book,’’ published by the Depart- ment. The Procedural Rules and Regulations (‘‘Regula- tions’’) implementing the Plan are contained in a book commonly and hereinafter referred to as the ‘‘Blue Book.’ | .These books are attached hereto in Appendices B and C, respectively. | The Current Plan—General Statement The current agreement, which became effective’ April 3, 1970, was signed by the Department, and by the ‘‘ Partici- pating Contractors Employers’ Associations’’ (PCEA) comprising thirteen ngtional associations of employers whose membership consists of more than 25,000 contractors in the building and construction: industry. (These thirteen associations are listed in Appendix A hereto.) The signing of the agreement was witnessed by then-Secretary of Labor George P. Shultz. (Green Book, p.14).6 — The Plan provides for three different decision-making: "5 At the time of the briefing and oral argument before the Court of Appeals in the instant case, the Plan then in effect had been approved * The Secretary of Labor issued the following Statement following the signing ceremony (USDL 11-150, April 7, 1970) : “In establishing the Construction Industry Collective Bargain- ing Commission last year, President Nixon expressed this Adminis. BB sihe A SL ETT LT TET 8 ‘bodies: (1) The National Joint Board for the Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes (‘‘Joint Board’’), created at the outset in 1948, to consider particular disputes arising on specific jobs and to render job decisions applicable to the particular job (or, in some situations, more broadly applicable to a locality) ; (2) the Appeals Board, created in 1965, to consider appeals from job decisions of the National Joint Board; and (3) ad hoc Hearings Panels, provided for from the outset of the Plan in 1948, to make decisions inyolving repetitive disputes, on a national basis. This machinery also operates at each level to encourage the voluntary settlement of jurisdictional disputes ee direct negotiations and mediation. tration’s deep qgmmiitment to the institution of free collective bargaining. “For this institution ‘to survive and prosper,’ he said, ‘the parties must assume the full share of their responsibility to the industry and to the Nation.’ “Today, I am gratified to participate in an occasion that sym- bolizes this assumption of private responsibility by labor and man- agement in the Nation’s vital building and construction industry. “The Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO, and the participating contractors employers’ associations have signed an important agreement that provides more effective pro- cedures for settling jurisdictional disputes locally and nationally. “By not only continuing but revitalizing the 22-year-old Na- tional Joint Board, the parties have strengthened the construction industry’s machinery for dealing with’ these troublesome and costly disputes. “Significantly, the agreement broadens Board representation by various segments of the industry, provides procedures for han- dling the most serious and recurring disputes and specifically cont siders consumer interests along with the interests of workers and employers. “The National Joint Board—established just after World War ‘ II—functions as the building and construction industry’s’ response to the type of private, voluntary solutions to jurisdictional disputes sought by the Congress. when it enacted the Taft-Hartley Act. “In January, the Construction Industry Collective Bargaining Commission, with members representing labor, management and the public, endorsed the development of private, dispute-settling procedures by the parties themselves. This agreement dealing with jurisdictional disputes—the product of hard and long negotiations— embodies just that kind of healthy, private action.” eee ee 9 The Plan is structured whereby the members of each of these three bodies are appointed by the signatories from their affiliated Unions and employer associations in a man- _ her so as to provide maximum and fair representation to the interests of each of these groups. (See the discussion, mfra at 16-21 regarding the operational features of the - Plan.) . Contrary to the statements in Laborers’ Union’s brief (pp. 25-27), the Secretary of Labor’s statement (supra n. 6) correctly reflects the fact that the Unions and employer associations affiliated with the signatories to the carrent Plan bring to it a broader representation of the building and construction industry than previously has been the case, Pa Unlike many other industries, the building and construc- tion industry is a multi-employer industry with thousands — of contractors and many trade associations te which they belong. The fact that some of these associations have failed or refused to join in signing the Plan or that certain of ’ these associations, such as the Associated General Con- tractors (AGC), have withdrawn their previous signatures to the Plan (see Laborers’ brief, p. 23), by no means ren- ders the current signatories unable to represent the inter- ests of employers in every segment of the industry." * Some of the thirteen associations comprising the PCEA have bound — their contractor members to the Plan by stipulation to this effect. Others fore AGC’s withdrawal, many of its members signed stipulations to be bound to the Plan. Despite the formal withdrawal from the Plan by AGC, many of its Members remain individually stipulated to the Plan. Many of these are also members of the associations which cur-, rently comprise the general contractor segment of the PCEA. w& 10 Oftthe thirteen organizations which comprise the PCEA, eight are ational associations of mechahical and specialty — cOptractors, and five are national associations of. contrac- . tom who employ primarily members of the basic trades— byicklayers (including masons), carpenters (including mill- wrights), iron workers, laborers, operating engineers and ~ teamsters. These latter. five organizations are the National Constructors Association (NCA), and four associations - which comprise the National Council of Erectors and Rig- gers (NCER) to wit, National Erector Association (NEA); Crane and Rigging Division 6& Heavy Specialized Carriers Conference ; National Association of Reinforcing Steel Contractors ; and National Association of Miscel- laneous, Ornamental and Architectural Products Contrac- tors. — The NCA: consists of thirty-four of the largest general _ contractors in the world (e.g., Bechtel Corp.; Day & Zim- merman, Inc.; Dravo Corp., Engineering Construction Division; Ebasco Services, Inc.; Kaiser Engineers; Kop- pers Co., Inc., Engineering & Construction Division; Stone &. Webster Engineering. Corp.). Many of the members of withdrew from the Plan and remain members of AGC. NCA members specialize in heavy industrial building con- struction (e.g., oil refineries, steel mills), although some of its members (e.g., Dravo Corp.) are also engaged in the so-called ‘‘heavy’’ branch of the industry.® More than any In addition, AGC members subcontract a large portion of their con- tracts to subcontractors who are members of the eight national mechani- cal and specialty associations included in the PCEA. These facts show that a very large portion of the annual construction volume referred to in the motion of AGC (p. 2) is performed by employers who are stipu- - lated to the current Plan. And, it should-be noted, that, insofar as the volume of employment is concerned, the bulk of organized employees in the industry are employed by the contractors represented by the PCEA. *The term “heavy” construction is used by some in the industry to refer to the construction of such projects as dams, levees and bridges. The former dtrector of labor ‘Trétations of Dravo Corp., G. T. Leonard, is a current member of the Joint Board. 4 the NCA were formerly members of AGC before AGC. ~ . ve 11 e members are usually responsible to the owner for the design and engineering, as well as the construction, of, the proj- ects.° NCA members employ approximately fourteen of -. the trades, including all of the basic trades in substantial numbers.’® Thus, NCA probably has a more broadly based outlook ag/’to all phases of the building and construction industry—including questions involving inter-union juris- diction—than any other employer group. The four associations constituting the National Council - of Erectors and Riggers perform industrial, commercial and commercial-residential building work as well as 80- called ‘‘heavy’’ work, and primarily employ members of the six basic trades. One of these associations, the NEA, ig composed of 130 contractors among which are ‘the big- gest steel erectors in the world (e.g., United States Steel Corp., American Bridge Division; Bethlehem Steel Corp.; _ contract received from a general contractor.” As indicated above, NCA w rhe reference in Laborers’ Union’s brief (P. 26 n. 85) to 1949. ' 1952 average annual employment figures. is, of course, completely out- dated. , - a / Ree oS EERIE, a iba oes RY 12 members of AGC before AGC withdrew from the Plan ’ and remain members of AGC." . _Operation of the Plan Regardless.of ‘Whether the Particular Employer Affected By the Dispute Is Bound Thereto As correctly noted by the court below (A. 370 n. 10), the . machinery of the Plan is operative regardless of whether or not the particular employer affected by the jurisdic- tional dispute (ie., the employer assigning the disputed work) has agreed to be bound to the Plan or to exercise his rights of participation which the Plan affords." Thus, the original Plan provided: “Tt shall be the duty of the J oint Board to consider and decide all cases of jurisdictional disputes in the building and construction industry, which are referred to it by any-of the international unions involved in the _ dispute; or an employer directly affected by the dis- pute on the work in which he is engaged; or by a par- ticipating organization representing such employer. ” (Emphasis added. ) Similarly, Article I, Section 4 of the current Plan pro- vides : ‘‘It shall be the duty of the Joint Board to con- ‘sider and decide cases of jurisdictional disputes in the building and. construction industry, which disputes are referred to it-by any of the International Unions in- volved in the dispute, or an employer directly affected by the dispute on the work in which he -is engaged or ™ The factual information in note 7 supra and in the three foregoing paragraphs has been supplied by the Chairman of’ the Joint Board and — the Secretary of the PCEA. ** The references in the opposing briefs to the Plan’s provisions re- . garding the binding to the Plan of stipulated contractors have no bear- ing on the Joint Board’s jurisdiction or on the legal issue presented in this case. Rather, they simply make it clear that, as a matter of contract- arbitration law, a non-stipulated employer is not subject to the require- ments imposed by the Plan and cannot be judicially compelled to abide by decisions réndered thereunder. See also supra n. 7. ee ee Te uk Bhs LD - . 13 by a participating organization representing such em- ployer.”’ (Emphasis added.) 13 | . That. the Joint Board has asserted jurisdiction and ren- dered decisions regardless of whether or not affected em- ployers have agreed to be bound to the Plan is reflected in many decisions which have been rendered by the NLRB since 1948 under Section 10(k) of the Act indicating that _the National Joint Board had accepted jurisdiction under NLRB 1094, 1103-1104 (1958) ; Millwrights Local 1102 Obligations Imposed Upon Affiliated Building and Construction Trades Unions 1. As noted Supra at 6, since 1955, the Constitution — of the Department has made the Plan binding on all affili- ** Laborers’ Union’s brief (p. 10 n. 9) omits from its quotation of this provision the phrase “ dispute, or”, The Regulations are consistent with the above quoted language from the Plan. They provide (p. 10), “When the Joint Board has received a struction industry.” That provision makes the procedures in the regu- y of the Internationa] Unions involved in the Sg ee pl ~ 14 \ ated unions of the Department;!* and since 1957, the Con- stitution has required that all jurjsdictional disputes be- tween affiliated National and International Unions or their _ affiliated Local Unions shall be adjusted according to the Plan.?® | | 2. Work Stoppages and Picketing Prohibited—Funda- mental to the operations of the Plan are the provisions dealing with work stoppages and picketing. The Plan states: ‘‘Pending a decision by the [Joint] Board or such settlement as may be arrived at through the office of the Chairman of the Joint Board, there shall be no stoppage of work rising out of any jurisdictional dispute. ..... Mem- _ bers of organization affiliated with the Building and Con- struction Trades Department shall continue to work on the basis of their original assignment.’’ (Green Book, Art. VI, Sec. 1, pp. 12-13.) The Plan goes on to provide (Sec. 2) : ‘‘Recognizing it is in the best interests of the parties to this Agreement, the Building and Construction Trades Department, on behalf of itself and the General Presidents of each of the affiliated National and Inter- national Unions, reaffirms their desire to eliminate work stoppages, slowdowns and other impediments to job progress in an attempt to comply with the provi- sions of the Plan prohibiting jurisdictional strikes and agree to enforce these provisions by direction and action of the respective International Offices. Should work stoppages persist for more than forty-eight (48) hours following notification by the National Joint. * Thus, with reference to the statements in the brief, amicus curiae, of Laborers’ Union (p. 22), while there were withdrawals. from the Plan by certain affiliated unions prior to 1955, since that time all affili- ated unions have been bound to the Plan. This is not to say that.there has been uniform compliance by all affiliates with each of the specific | obligations imposed by the Plan. ** The Regulations similarly provide: “When a contractor has miade a . specific work assignment, all unions shall remain at work and process any complaint over a jurisdictional dispute in accordance with the pro- cedures herein established by the Joint Board.” (Blue Book, p. 6.) 15 Board (Saturdays, Sundays and legal holidays ex- cluded), the’ parties hereto agree that the contractor shall be free to Pursue methods of settlement other than the Joint Board established hereunder. ’? The Regulations specifically provide: shall instruct the Geheral President to direct the mem. assigned work, and to keep work in continuous oper- ation pending a settlement of the dispute.’’ (Blue Book, When an International Union requests a job decision and its members remain off the job or hold up disputed work, processing for Joint Board decisions does not start until the International Union has returned its members to work. When a union remains off the job or establishes a picket line forcing a contractor to refer a jurisdictional] dispute, and ‘the Joint Board decides that the work in dispute is number of work days the work stoppage or picket line was — in effect. During the. delay period; the disputed work pro- _ ceeds in-accordance with the contractor’s original assign- ment. (Blue Book, p. 12.) ‘ 3. The Plan provides: “Tt shall be a violation of this agreement for any Local Union, International Union, employer or em- “‘When the Joint Board receives a protest of an alleged violation from an international union, an em- ees Pe eS eee - : 16 ployer or an employers’ association, it shall proceed to make a decision and to determine the action which should be taken to correct the violation consistent with the applicable legal obligations of the parties. ‘‘Wailure by the Parties to accede to the decision of . the Joint Board under: this paragraph shall be treated in the same manner as noncompliance with a job deci- oa (mphasis added.) (Green Book, Art. ITI, Sec. sp. at. : | 4. The Plan provides : ‘‘The Building and Construction Trades Depart- ment and all International Unions affiliated with the Building ‘and Construction Trades Department shall, in accordance with their constitutional powers, request each of the Building and Construction Trades Coun- cils, District Councils and Local Unions, respectively : ‘‘(a) To secure written assent or stipulation to the | ‘Plan for Settling Jurisdictional Disputes Nationally and Locally’ by all Employers in signed agreement with said International Union, Council and/or Local Union except for such employers who are stipulated to the Plan by the action of the employers’ association of which they are members; or ‘“(b) To proceed at earliest opportunity to negoti- ate National Joint Board stipulation into all. agree- ments with each employer whose employees are repre- sented by such District Council or Local Union.’’ (Green Book, Art. V, Sec. 1, p. 12.) 5. The Regulations provide that, ‘‘The affected Unions — and contractors shall promptly comply with each job deci- sion of the Joint Board.’? (Emphasis added.) (Blue Book, p. 14.) This includes the obligation by Unions te disclaim work which employers—stipulated. or non-stipulated—offer to employees contrary to a decision under the Plan. The Joint Board, Appeals Board and Hearings Panels The Joint Board—The brief, amicus curiae, of the Laborers’ Union (p. 27) contends ‘‘that while the Joint Board purports to be structured to provide equal represen- _ 17 tation for all segments of the industry, there ‘are, in fact, no employers on the Joint Board whose voice or vote repre- | sents the interests of the general contractor and his laborer- employees.’’ Contrary to the position of Laborers, the National Labor Relations Board has not taken the position that the mem- bership of the Joint Board is unrepresentative of the gen- eral contracting branch of. the industry, as is apparent — from the fact that it defers to the Plan and does not con- duct a Section 10(k) hearing in cases where the affected employer is stipulated to the Plan. It is the same Joint Board which issues decisions in cases where such employer is not stipulated. If the machinery is adequately repre- sentative in the former, it is similarly representative in cases where the employer is not stipulated. : Moreover, Laborers’ statement that no employers on the Joint Board represent ‘‘the interests of the general contrac- tor and his laborer-employees’’ (emphasis added) forgets the fact that the interests of these employees, and employ- ees from all of the basic trades, are represented by the unions through their labor representatives on the Joint Board. The Joint Board consists of an impartial chairman,'¢ four regular and four alternate labor members appointed by the Executive Council of the Department, and four _Tegular and four alternate employer members who are representatives of and selected by the Participating Con- tractors Employers’ Associations. As far as the labor mem- bers are concerned, the Plan requires that two each of the regulars and the alternates must be appointed from among the basic trades (with a similar distribution to be appoint- ** The Chairman is selected by the Joint Negotiating Committee which the bargaining group delegated by the signatories to the. Plan and 18 ed from antong the specialty trades). (Green Book, Art. IJ, Sec. 1, pp. 1-2.) Employees in the basic trades are repre- sented on the current Joint Board by officials of Unions which include the Operating Engineers, Bricklayers and- Plasterers (who represent cement masons). Even insofar ‘as the representation on the Joint Board of the interests of general contractors are concerned, Laborers’ brief is incorrect. Half of the employer members on the Joint Board are from the NCA and the NCER (see discussion supra at 10-12). When a dispute is submitted to the Joint Board by an _ International Union, notice is given by the Joint Board to the affected employer, and he is requested to furnish a _ full description of the disputed work. (Blue Book, p. 12.) International Unions whose affiliates are engaged in the dispute are provided an opportunity to state in writing to the Joint Board the basis for their respective claims. (Blue Book, pp. 10, 11.) No member of the Joint Board may participate in any case where the tradé union or employer of which he is an officer. or representative is involved in the dispute. (Green Book, Art. II, Sec. 1, pp. 1-2.) Any affiliated International Union and any stipulated employer national association, which does not have direct representa- tion on the Joint Bodrd hearing a specific case, may be represented and participate in the Joint Board’s discus- sion of such case. (Green Book, Art. III, Sec. 1(e), p. 7; Blue Book, p. 17.) Any affected International Union or contractor has the right to a reconsideration of a Joint Board decision by the submission of additional written evidence or by oral hear- ing, provided that the decision has been accepted and put into: effect by the affected parties and remains in continu- _ ous effect until reconsideration is had. The Unions and, in cases where the request for reconsideration is made by an affected employer, the employer, are given the opportunity to present written evidence or be heard and present wit- > 19 nesses. A request for reconsideration must be submitted within ten working days after the original decision. (Blue Book, pp. 14-15.). : Book, pp. 18-19.) ' Umpire for mediation and the establishment of a Hearings Panel and a national decision. (Green Book, Art. ITI, See. 5, p. 9.) | | , The functions of the Appeals Board lie in two areas: to decide appeals from decisions of the Joint Board and to consider requests for the referral of disputes to a hearings panel for decision on a national basis. With respect to the first function, the Plan provides in pertinent part: ‘‘The Appeals Board is empowered to | 20 review and decide any appeal from a decision or ruling of the National Joint Board . . . and stch decision of the Appeals Board shall be final. The jurisdiction of the Appeals Board shall be discretionary. . . .’’ (Green Book, | Art. IT, Sec. 5, p. 6.) A request to consider an appeal may be filed with the Appeals Board by (a) any of the Inter- national Unions involved in the dispute; (b) employers involved or directly affected by the dispute; or (c) national contractor associations with members involved or directly affected by the dispute. (Blue Book, p. 26.) A request to consider an appeal must be filed no later than three work- ing days after the Joint Board’s decision. The request must include a statement of the reasons for the appeal. (Blue Book, p. 26.) The request to consider an appeal from decision of the National Joint Board constitutes a stay of - such decision. (Blue Book, p. 27.) In exercising its discretion as to whether or not to accept . an-appeal, the Appeals Board gives consideration to such factors as the significance of the dispute, the frequency - with which such disputes have arisen, the contribution a . decision may make to the resolution of disputes and the improvement of relations. (Blue Book, p. 28. .) The Appeals Board must ‘‘promptly’’ review and decide any request to consider appeals and, where it’ has decided to accept an appeal, ‘‘promptly’’ set a date for the consideration of the case. If the Appeals Board rejects the consideration of the appeal, the decision of the Joint Board shall promptly be placed into effect.:The decision of the Appeals Board must be complied with at once. (Blue Book, pp. 27-29.) With respect to the second function, the Plan provides: ‘‘When a dispute is filed with the Appeals Board by a - National or International Union, with a specific request for a decision on a national basis which would become part . of the record, the Board shall review the request, and if the Board finds it is an issue not already determined on a national basis by a decision or agreement of record, it 21 shall refer the issue to the Impartial Umpire who, shall call a conference of the General Presidents of the Unions - involved for the purpose of determining whether or not a national agreement is possible. If an agreement is con- cluded and properly signed by the contesting parties and attested by the Impartial Umpire, the terms and provisions of the agreement shall remain in effect as per the provi- sions of the Constitution of the Department. In the event that the dispute cannot be settled by agreement or is not settled by agreement at the end of six months, the Impar- tial Umpire shall docket the case for hearing and decision by a hearings panel... .”’ (Green Book, Art. III, Sec. 2, p. 8.) Hearings Panels—Such ad hoc panels are composed of the Impartial Umpire of the Appeals Beard, two disinter- ested General Presidents, of affiliated International Unions appointed by the Executive Council of the Department, and two disinterested contractor representatives appoint- ed by the Participating Contractors Employers’ Associa- - tions. (Green Book, Art. III, Sec. 4, p. 9.) : _ When a dispute reaches a hearings panel from either the Joint Board or Appeals Board, as described above, the Impartial Umpire notifies -all General’ Presidents of affili- ated International Unions and the National Participating Employers Associations, stating the controversy to be con- sidered and that all interested: persons will be permitted to intervene. Briefs are submitted and exchanged by all parties: to the dispute. (Green Book, Art. II, Sec. 3, pp. . 8-9.) The hearings panel must consider al] pertinent evi- dence and render a decision if possible within ten days. after the conclusion of the hearing. Decisions of the hear- ings panel are not appealable to the Appeals Board and must immediately be accepted and complied with by all ' parties to the Plan. (Green Book, Art. IIT, See. 7, p. 9.) In considering such disputes the hearings panel must ascer- tain whether and to-what extent the disputed work opera- ~ oN 22 tions are governed by a decision or agreement of record’. and must make national jurisdictional determinations of _, work operations not governed by decisions or agreements of record. (Green Book, Art. III, Sec. 8(d), p. 10.) - Standards For Work Jurisdiction Under the Plan The standards established by the Plan for, determining which of the contesting groups of employees has jurisdic- tion over. p&rticular work must:be understood as much for their value in enabling affiliated unions to refrain’ from claiming work over which they do not have,,jurisdiction, and thus avoid jurisdictional disputes, as for the govern- ing standards which will be applied by decisional tribunals under the Plan in the resolution of such disputes. | ~ Foremost among these standards are (1) “‘decisjons of cecord’’ issued. pursuant to the Plan or predecessor juris- dictional disputes machinery in the building and construc- tion industry, and which have resolved disputes on a na- - tionally applicable basis; and (2) jurisdictional agreements entered into between affiliated International. Unions and been approved by the Building and Construction Trades Department, and which are also applicable on a national basis. These decisions and agreements fre set out in the Green Book and are indexed for ready reference. The Plan- provides : ‘‘When a dispute is filed, the Joint Board. shall . in all cases first investigate the claims of the disputing parties to determine whether or not a ‘disposition thereof ~ has been made by a preyious. decision of record or by re- corded agreement between the parties to this dispute and issue a ruling as to the decision or agreement governing in the case, and determining which ‘oné of the parties to the dispute has a rightful claim to the work under the agreement or decision of récord.’’ — Book,. Art. Ul, Sec. 1(a), pp. 6-7.) It should be emphasized that the Plan on ae the ' / : i decisions of record by Hearings Panels.’” See, e.g., the provisions in Article III, Section 2 of the Plan, quoted supra at 20-21 in connection with the second function of . In the absence of a decision or agreement of record, the Plan provides: ‘If the Joint Board finds that the dispute is not covered by a decision or agreement of record, it shall render a job decision, in which the Board should consider the established trad&practice and prevailing practice in the locality’? (Green Book, Art. IIT, Sec. 1(b), p. 7). The Plan goes on to provide that, ‘‘Because efficiency, cost and good management. are essential to the Well-being of the industry, the Joint Board should not ignore the interests z a Thus, for example, on August 24, 1966, a hearings Panel decision . was rendered resolving an extremely«repetitive dispute between Car- penters and ‘Lathers over the installation of ceiling systems. The Panel included John T. Dunlop, then-Impartial Umpire under the Plan. Among. participants in the Proceeding were AGO, the National Acoustical. Con- tractors Association; the Gypsum Drywall Contractors, as well a the unions to the dispute. The decision was unsuccessfully Lathers v. Dunlop, Civil Action ‘No. 1221-66 (D. D.C. 1967), per euriam 382 F. 2d 176 (D. C. Cir. 1967), cert. denied 889 U.S. 971, © £0 eliminate the disruption of industrial peace: * * A recent development further shows the ‘continuing flexibility afford. ed by the Plan in ite fone on account of jurisdictio disputes. On February 14, 1971, the ‘Ment and-the National Constructors ian of Haaren pating Contractors Employers’ Associations—entered into 4 urisdic- tional Agreement.” Under this Agreement, jurisdictional work and picketing are prohibited. Violations of this Agreement ean subject ' the Department’s ‘affiliated Unions -to financial perlalties” Employer parties to this Agreement agree to make work assignments in accord- voluntary participation in the Agreement by other employer associations whose membefs stipulate to the Plan and by individual employers sign- ‘ . / . 7. . ¥ » . 24 of the consumer in 2 settling jurisdictional disputes.’’ 1Gree8 Book, Art. III, Sec. 1(f), p. 8).'° ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THE PLAN” The Plan remains the primary method by which work assignment disputes in the building and. construction in- dustry are determined and resolved. Because of the gen- . érally short duration of construction jobs and the neces- sity to complete various phases on) a schedule, time is of the essence anda critical factor in the settling of work assignment disputes in this. industry. The Joint Board meets weekly to decide cases. Disputes referred to the Joint Béard by. Tuesday of a given week are decided at the weekly Thursday. meeting of the.following week. There is no backlog of waiting cases. (Information obtained - from the Chairman of the Joint Board.) ‘‘Thus the Joint. Board Plan meets the requirement for prompt action.”’ Strand, supra n. 2, p. 103.7” % Laborers’ Union reference (brief, p. 24) to this axtiaten as “rhetorical gloss” is unwarranted and inconsistent with the Secretary - of Labor’s recognition (supra n. 6) that the Plan “specifically considers consumer interests along with the interests of workers and employers.” It may be noted that the opinion by the court below set forth the Joint Board’s clarified decision in the dispute between the Plasterers and Tile>Setters containing a partial award to Tile Setters “in the neta of efficient job operation.” A. 355 n. 6. * Strand, supra n. Z, p. 99, observed in 1961: “Considered in light of the previous attempts to establish a method for the settlement of juris- dictional disputes, the Joint Board’s accomplishments have been astounding.” _ ™ Insofar as the Plan’s. Appeals Board is concerned, its decision whether to consider an appeal is made within one to two weeks from ' the filing of the request and the determination of an appeal is made within another two to three weeks. (Information obtained from the Impartial Umpire of the Appeals Board.) The Appeals Board considers requests for appeals from approximately 19. percent of the Joint Board’s decisions, and grants approxiniately 85 percent of such requests. A sub- stantial number of the appeals granted are resolved by the disputing unions prior to decision by the Appeals Board. — of the Appeals Board, February 1968 - February 1971.) “* By contrast, for the fiscal year 1968, it required a total: of. 172.5 NI Gist 8 wo OO ——— 25 Even more indicative of the stability being promoted by the Plan are the thousands of dispute-free work assign- ments which are being made every day on building and construction jobs, following pre-job conferences among affected groups, by reference to the jurisdictional prece- dents under the Plan. As John T. Dunlop wrote in a letter to participants in the Plan, upon his resignation as Chair- man of the Joint Board in 1957, ‘‘The course of a dispute in almost all job decisions, except those on novel issues, are largely predictable by lines of precedent.’? 40 Labor Relations. Reference Manual (LRRM) 18, 21. Stipulated end non-stipulated employers alike are being guided by ’ - and are applying these precedents on a practical basis and are quiet beneficiaries of the industrial peace which they afford.”* Strand, supra n..2, p. 101 referred to the fact that median days from the filing of the unfair labor practice charge to the NLRB’s 10 (k) determination. For the fiscal year 1969, it required a total of 206.8 median days. For the fiscal year 1970, it required a total. of 230.0 median days. (Information obtained from ‘the Office of the Executive Secretary of the NLRB.) « "The AGC has published’ a book entitled “National Jurisdictional nts Not Printed In the Green Book” (revised September, 1963) (154 pp.) which continues to be used by AGC members throughout the country in making work assignments. The “Foreword” of this book states: - ; “A basic Principle of the National Joint Board Plan is that contractors who subscribe to the Plan agree to make their work assignments in accordance with certain established procedures. : “The Green Book, containing the decisions and agreements of “ ‘record, constitutes the official guide for work assignments. Such SS ee ae 26 ‘‘yradually, the decisions and policies of the Joint Board © caused the’ industry to begin to rely more on precedent and compromise and less upon economic power.”’ | Strand, supra n. 2, p. 101, referred to the above quoted letter by John T. Dunlop regarding the precedential values of the Plan: | ‘‘Dunlop also cited as scapenplisiinants the recogni- tion Arta (1) the Joint Board Plan allows jurisdic- tion to be determined in advance of bidding with uni- form application among contractors ; (2) the plan seeks to regulate competition among unions in the industry by introducing jurisdictional pecer ad ; and (3) na- tional jurisdictional agreements are‘... the very best way to resolve these questions.’ ”’ : . DIFFICULTIES CAUSED BY NLRB INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 10(k) The private machinery in this area, like other decisional - institutions in our legal process, finds its greatest. appeal in the stability it can afford. By establishing criteria for decisions, and determining cases within a uniform frame- work, the machinery enables unions to be able to predict the outcome of disputes and to order their objectives and programs accordingly. The results are a reduction of the number of work stoppages for such objectives, the resolu- tion of disputes before they reach the level of formal deter- mination, private or governmental, the permanent resolu- tion of disputes following private’ determination, and greater industrial peace in general. All this is disrupted _ nts of record have been attested by the Board and approved by the Building and Construction Trades Department. — . “In addition, | there are numerous other national agreements between international unions which have not yet been approved by the Department but some of which are binding on employers under the Joint Board’s rules of procedure. “In order that our membership may be as fully informed as possible regarding these agreements, the AGC, with the permission of the Chairman of the. National Joint Board, has compiled these partment. -Two of each shall be appointed. from | among the basjc trades ee each shall be ap- Ra i sp avi Ma i iy ¥ BS, * ‘ . b. Re ; MR, © 8 land rin 5 f i ta a le: cee SH) re % ts d r =— . yo nase a we Y* 3 oa URE Fat NEA, as Waal, - Wee ies We, Ss = 4 t ‘ ee he ah a mes a ant a M © 4 : ¢ 47a SR Ak 7 ‘ a a. & a -_. / ty A : Ni iy 4 b 7 oe apt “ y % ir . aS 5 Me Ga 7 3 nN A ¥ be : > ‘“ 5 8 aqegtit Se pe ait TN ; «i Sane: — - = Q a " . i Ms g Gua aie) f Y, be Z c 4 ae g eh i 7, oe SS om ) e : aah Be tes \ am te! , A i ay 5 F ~S Cais 2 ; “| 3 J* 5 } x’ “S . J . ' : bee By d i . ¥ 3 $s { if por at, % 5 Pe 4 4 ‘3 MRS EE ace Selif Ese Hee GO Se Rae : ; sistent pie Ryde y i vio ant gt Neo HEH aR : 4 S : Sore se GAN oath poe Rm ca a e eS. been ity HO y Reh fe Ne : 3 r pas ee KEN ens 2, C se F s } ee, ‘ ; ; —_ iss a RA ‘ q om i : i i ‘ ee ? nts Ae ‘ Cae Dinge aeee 2 a ay YS St as heey v > a oo. . We CURA RP Rs , ae i : Boo ; UNE aL Seay 5 Pe i ~ ¥ eh a Bite : SS _ . A? SRNR FAST Oe Fh dl ‘ Pest , One oY ‘i : PE CAENGH — yA Set gee ‘ My : ‘ 28 ‘ : ys a mt . > 4h ae uly 3) Seielts POE et 6 ss ES ico Shannen aa \ HS 3 Pane ine ; satin Bohs: . 5 soilhoe veh ; ae . : Jom ‘See: 1. ; (ay hearing « specific 7 ae k oy Pye Sas i na Bat eck Oe Ee sats x . ‘ . ars : ~~ R i | r AN art ; ; wae Ne Ne ah . ans i ie i. . one by , & i q ~ MeN » kenrg, é 5 P Pag te =. i * aia % fete . r C Wish na ‘ " hss} a Sy Fic. > a bo WAeD y RN Sa reane es Rt 3s i STOR : AMS. “I . . Sey 7 id “ Aa a A i 5 : i Phi: ‘ Ss i o tae: é “—_ : ay ys ‘ 4 + : “ wees ; : oti ee PeNevapetn: BE Oe, RA ee - ona. “ , as Gown aS . a y x, | ae a s et ‘i , ¢ AS INNS Same: i 4 . * Bias ei 7 B ‘ a Pitas “ Re Sato : BY ayy : 5 i ‘ iS Y q Bae 5 ¥ : 2 7 ” “ ‘ mS , Seat : * PERE: \ a east wy ‘ ay cy " - Yer die ft . B x \ AY rity ‘ a. i & itz as : ¥ SEES SO Ho Peat n a= :§ aa : () GE ROV HEE iM Hea | He ee aN ‘3 ee oot oes fee) SIRS oe E settlement or Mg oS | ae? oes > ihe pale . ¥ ae ‘ : — oy ee * oo © «= ee “oe : a “ » o Gebee: hele 1 ea — 9 P ; fs, lew (3S ‘i fii the Joint Board i has be shall the J Panel, Rut tit Nye aoe ey By a it : “% af y . } f wai i 5 , ged at i ea ra @ ha Jae ( re ae I ” pre tote Bae eis ‘ adi nai, | i Bing , @ a | a ‘ 2 Baicsd . Rida’ Ser a Y a- # De , S i peel Mie A : de . t ; ae * Sy 5 : s oe 5p sae awe es eB i. EY wate io Coc Bei Sav NN ares * “t Re ) ges Ss 2 Bo a SS Ge we aN ce > Ss ssl oink seal de % etek” see bara eae os sare 2 Attest: a Wo. J. McSontey,_ "| Pres., Building Tradex ee Department. a + , 2d G. V. P. S58 : Cuas. A. Cuuten, $d GV. Po . S57 - + ie. ° Ss ™ ae j Pee oe : Sah RRM DEROMERRO NS Ge ¥ zi BS Sa a é eta Sa Re ax eC ee ees a ie Si ° ¢ Teg eae A ° a el! ERR ee re A UN on va ae bi fi H A . a ' a. Naceeee : b* Sages : Be i ae Lo ee 3 i ; a : pant ae 4 - Now Peete a oe =. Sesgead th Se ‘ rae a, HBS REE. $ 4 roe LSP . ERE ES RAMI SEER cee i RP BY 3 Roos hoe © SRC Tine ve a. 4 a ong f | iene Va alias ; ; -. aE Kegs : Es {oie . . BAS 5 eae Eo ees Diok ie © Hata stip 4 ; i Oy ee a 3 ean 4 wey . poeta seme at eS aes Sure he oN Sd aX 4 ors gl > aay - “ Sted \ - ey ANY My ; SERRE AER RST RC RENAN gh EIS PER ULE E ee) e hy ° * . Py . 3 ig rae - Ry 4 q : 7 My \ my a > ‘ ' : : ; : as - . & . a STRAY a F : a Rade yee A x \S } ¥ * \ : Seah ea a Soe ee) i ae * . as ; ; | i S : | nfl HST i ij d t ‘ : i ws 4 J tat 3 ; aA ‘ Y —_ re SCE aa : aoe * , ~~ : 2 “io ‘ N . wt * ‘ x = i & ‘ * ee . aK ee 5 wf u : Bas iz . 4 4 i ; a ; ; ; 3 n > s ‘ > ‘ by i Tee ant ‘. ¥ +. - \ s Sy x ~ ve N * Seas : ‘ : ’ 4 BY Ss : {tia * SEN YE ‘ Wi ‘ « a SRO car papbilav ca Va b ten Setar es Ate a) oI ‘ RNG = Laue Saas a ide SN a cae RP SAN aL ein Pe en Sas rs ear ar 237 DP Pee ae ee aa 3 f Be a a en a ze Lio | See 5 a oars Z & 3 SE Tot = wre: eae ee. pee re ii si i te itil iy if ii i Ni : w~ o e 1 n : — co: es Boiler Makers’ classification of Tne i! oe 4 ne Bs oy nShenwith Shall be aupembled buildings similarly by the, sign 1h ys i - ape os S a re is eae et =. ‘ 7g +4 ery e - ee : De ae, ; bee a . 7 OMB cy = ; i 2... mo . ; , ‘ ig . : B WA x % : .™ } yes - basal MM Aa ge ‘ : iy fe } > ; i hai, ean oe a ae >. ; Tin : oe Chg os be 3 a i a 5 ‘ eR 4 y $ q part 4 3 Ss 3 y aT. NS: apis e ~~ ; ai OF . 3 \Ba I eb nee cee is ay 23 soe i Fs 7 Sal : WM. P 2 : ‘h it | ete p | yi | by i gist cle ae Srey ess ; ‘ Wald ig em 3 P *, ie peek > ae Fs: sh me a Y or = : ri fst Sr a iy eats ¢ E NE + 5 : * at ee S * > . ate . aS eh ys sal r x e fe: ee 25. fe * « cee _ , co” pee Wa a igh oF a a i Na Ria ¥ a NE Ning? res oi é Bh pee Geis = A we \ . A) bo NOM Ee Sete GR SOFA. As iy 2 : Ried, hae ke me 2% ye Ca SS ARE as He Shy Seat pean Dee ol Bb ea ey ‘ Me ge >= CGI. ~ cae id i é . eS i Ee Re gt af 3 ae : om ! ns K 2 ‘ xv , , ¢ i ‘ Aa . me fA are a oS ae : a2 f : ; q oe 5 eae i Me cae Ne m Beet yy oe. ¥ ak, - ‘ + ‘ ae ‘ Papas . es P s ee L242: 32 +... pete - ‘ . Las , > . * Sg Ms ; i Wasnt) 4 : : rg SFiS 2 West ee 2 9 Dae $ c ¢ 4 Nahas a - 7 Pen Weare Ww Av , Ra r % F § 3 . $s a te eet ba = ‘ x ‘ z te * * B “hE 2 of ee ; ah | ; 4 : c ( Gee. Fy © t Nd . s Sa AN Shite x , 4 i \ f " c* 4 : a ss i 3 na 4 - S "! t y \ , Ee ; : ; ,, x 7 if § M ‘ , eer y Bi Seay : : * bene 3 A : i ~ rane i report * For full * a r. z ? " ane Case 41 of “3 Ss Report. 1 . e Pon } } . »: Wy SAN a 4 é : fy ‘ Gane 3 , oy ‘ bi ; : 5, SRS ie ‘ a ‘ rs z as say ae “a : ak 4 : x : j . Ciba een, 34} : \ w: + y: cae Ss og ae 7 Me 5 ee Estes ts Pome F a 4 ; Se SEC cis . 3 s pees tae OEE @ Hi : “ey * 3 We eg ee FF OAR. . — "e } : spp - RS At to in the “Tn the matter ‘of the it ig the t ig the decision of the title, ee Bo e¢ the __| Upon that portion of the report of the Executive —_ O..8 5 ~ ee 67 $ OATES eo = ° ~ 7. ° ere : 4 ve Py a es a AG Pet oho > et no Aen OF oe SO neg Ee 2 ’ and gutters shall be the work of the Cement Finishers. . ; ‘7. Straight edging, floating, trowelling, edging, rubbing and brushing shall be the work of the ‘Cement Finishers. , 8. It is understood that this memorandum is entered into for the purpese of clarifying juris- diction as outlined above and in the event of ‘any ~ dispute arising in eonnection with the work. as outlined above, the said dispute shall be referred to the, General Presidents of the* International Unions parties hereto. In the event of any dispute arising on any work not covered ‘by this agree- ment such as bridges, viaducts and underpasses, the said dispute shall be immediately referred to the General Presidents of the International Unions involved, or to whomever the said General ‘Presi- dents may assign, for the purpose of attempting to adjust the said dispute amicably. During the period of time that these attempts ‘are being made. for ad- justment there shall be no stoppage of work on the ; » job. . . . . . Operative Plasterers’ arid Cement Finishers’ Inter- national Association: . JOHN E. Rooney, ’ JOHN J. HAvck, President. First Vice President. Bricklayers, Masons: and Plasterers’ International Union: . : HARRY C. ‘BATES, ' A. J. CLELAND. President. ‘International Hod Carriers’, Building and Common.. Laborers’ Union of America: Jos. V. MORESCHI, JOHN W.. GARVEY. ** General President. July 19, 1948 60 Attested: RICHARD J. GRay, President, Building and Construction ‘Trades Department, AFL. AGREEMENT UNDER NATIONAL JOINT ' BOARD FOR SETTLEMENT -OF° JURIS- DICTIONAL DISPUTES; dale sand CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY - Wethe undersigned request that Joint Board No. - 1 be discharged. “The issue in dispute is the laying of wood fibre conduit underground for the carrying of electrical wires-and cables.” It is agreed tH&t this work is the work of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers. Signed this 13th day of July, 1948. | ° ‘International Hod Carriers’, Building and Common Laborers’ Union of America: Jos. V. MORESCHI, General President. International Brotherhood of Electri- . cal Workers: .D. W. Tracy, , , International President. Attested: RIcHARD J. Gay, ; President of the Building and Con-_ struction Trades Dept., A..F. of L. Iron §Workers—Elevator Constructors Directional Elevators AGREEMENT ) May, 26, 1953 For the purpose of establishing complete har- mony and: cooperation -on-the erection of two directional elevators for the Bowser Engineering 61 —— > ‘Company im various parts of the country, the Inter- * national Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron. Workers, and the International . Union of Elevator Constructors, hereby enter into the following agreement, effective on and from June 1, 1953. One team of elevator constructors to not less than two iron workers while installing the follow- .ing: 1—crane rails, 2—crane. bridges, 3—hoisting of all elevator equipment necessary to be in place before pent house roof is poured, 4—optional hoist- ing of crane drives, 5—all hatchway steel that replaces normal elevator’ hatchways, 6—catwalks, platforms, stairways and ladders. The Bowser Engineering: Company agrees © to pay iron workers the regular wage scale in the jurisdiction of the Local Union in which the proj- ect is: located- plus 25 cents-per hour ‘to one iron. worker who acts as foreman.under the supervision of the eleyator mechanic on the job. Signed for Intérnational Association of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers: ’ JOHN L. McCarthy, Gen. Vice President. _ Signed for International Union of Elevator (on- structors: J. A. ALTMAN, Reg. Business Representative. 4 ‘Attested July 10, 1953 JOHN T. DUNLOP, Chairman ‘National Joint Board. Boilermakers-Ironworkers + “September 23, 1953 The undersigned representatives of the Interna- tional Association of Bridge, Structural and. Ornamental Iron Workers and the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders, 62 om e Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers recommend to the respective General’ Presidents the attached agreement for the settlement of~ jurisdictional disputes between the two organizations. .*. (Signed) J. R. DOWNEs, ‘International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iron Work- ers (Signed) ‘J. P. McCoutium, International Brotherkesd of Boiler- makers, Iron Shipbuilders, Blackemith, : : Forgers and Helpers.” September 23, 1953 ' Memorandum of Agreement This memorandum of agreement between the International Association of Bridge, Structural and: Ornamental Iron, Workers: and the, International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders, Blacksmiths, Forgers and Helpers supplements and interprets the ‘agreement of October 15, 1928 be-— tween the two organizations and the decision of record of May 19, 1947. It is the purpose of this agreement ‘to improve relations between the two trades, to eliminate work stoppages which are costly to the membership of both organizations and. to the industry, to settle jurisdictional disputes directly between the two trades, and mutually to assist each union to secure work coming within its recognized jurisdiction. In order to achieve these objectives, it isanandatory upon the membership of local unions affiliated with both International Unions to comply with the pro- visions of this memorandum of agreement. It is expressly understood and agreed that this agreement shall not relate to or have any bearing 63 os ~ ‘on jurisdictional disputes that may exist or in the future occur, between either of the parties hereto with any other International Union or subordinate ’ body thereof. . - 1. WIRE MESH: Wire mesh. when attached or ~ - welded directly to the breeching, stacks or vessels shall be installed. by Boilermakers, and wire mesh ‘when attached or fastened to lugs, clips, bolts, nuts or any other attachments (which have already been _attached or welded to: the breeching, stacks or vessels by “enmeenee) shall be installed by Iron Workers. 7 & DERRICKS. Where a derrick is used by both crafts, one craft shall erect and the other craft shall dismantle same. Where such derrick. is used only by one of the crafts, then that craft shall erect and dismantle same. 3, PRECIPITATORS. Plate —werk--and__ buck- stays and internals shall be the work-of the mem- bers of the Boilermakers; structural supports shall be the work of the Iron Workers including the house roof. Roof supports or lugs attaching directly — to the precipitator shell shall be the work of the: Boilermakers.’ When roof supports attach to lugs, the Boilermakers shall weld the lug to the precipi- _tator shell. and the Iron Workers shall erect the “roof supports thereto. 4. OVERHEAD SUPPORTING STEEL FOR STEAM GENERATORS . — fa)! The erection of structural | ‘members, which “may be channels, beams or angles, and which are directly attached to and suspended from the building - roof steel for the purpose of supporting the steam generating unit shall be the work of the Iron Workers. (b)- -— erection of all rods or other steel mem- 64 2 _ bers, attached to the members described in para- graph (a), and used far the purpose of supporting tubes and other Boilermakers’ work, shall be per- formed by the Boilermakers. . 5. THE ERECTION AND REPAIR OF BLAST FURNACES The following work items sHall be erected and installed by the Iron Workers: . Foundation rod and bands €olumn bases and columns Main, top furnace platform (exept supports _ which weld, or rivet to shell) Top super-structure Beil trolley a Bell. beams: oo : Bell cables Jib-crane and mast All top mechanism such as large bell, small bell, bell rods, large bell hopper, gas seal hood, distributor, revolving hopper, receiving hopper. and small bell seat Skip bridge Skip cars and cables Skip operating mechanism such as skip hoist, _ large and small bell cylinders Cast house structural steel and roof ~-—Skip house Skip bridge ‘A-frame Iron and cinder runners and cast house auxiliaries Trestle and stock house parts such as coke, stqne and ore bins . Coke and ore chutes Seale car and larry cars - Pug mill machinery Elevator shafts 65 The following work items shall be- hie an installed by the Boilermakers: . ~ Hearth jacket — a , Hearth coolers = Tuyere jacket Blast furnace shell ‘dated November 13, 1953, from General President * Lyons to International President -Charles J. Mac- Gowan, has been reviewed by the writer. It is the opinion of the officials of this Inter- national Association that the suggestions outlined by President MacGowan warrant consideration and that, for the purpose of clarification, further understandings should be developed. - . Inasmuch as the “Memorandum of Agreement” dated September 23, 1953—and signed by yourself and the writer—has been ratified by the Inter-. national Executive Council of the‘Brotherhood of Boilermakers, and the General Executive Council af this International Association, it is our opinion’ that no change should be made in this -document as such action would require further ratification. from the Executive Councils of both organizations. It is agreeable to the officials of this International Association that the following clarifications will be stipulated: ° “It is mutually agreed between the two Inter- national Unions that the ‘awarding of the blast furnace bells to the Structural Iron Workers is without prejudice to the Boilermakers’ historic © claims ‘over all vessels requiring tight. joints.” It is also. understood that the work item. “mantle” should be included ‘im the Boilermakers’ division of Section 5 ‘of, the “Memorandum of Agreement.” It shall be understood that’ the meaning of Section 4, Paragraph (b) of the “Memorandum. of Agreement”—captioned OVERHEAD SUP- PORTING STEEL FOR STEAM GENERA- TORS—shall be as follows:— | “The erection of all rods and other steel ‘members, attached to the members described a . 43 in Paragraph (a) and used for the purpose of supporting tubes and other Boilermaker’s work, which are a part of the steam generating unit, shall be performed by the Boilermakers.” I believe that confirmation of these clarifications by International President Charles J. MacGowan and General President J. H. Lyons, as well as -yourself and the writer, would be sufficient and thereby eliminate any neéd to reopen the present “Memorandum of Agreement” as ratified by both -International Unions. a , I am, with best wishes ‘ Fraternally -yours, - « Lg J. R. DOWNES, JRD:HB a General Secretary. ’ January 18, 1954 R. J. Gray, President _ . Building & Construction Tradés Department - American Federation of Labor Washington, D. C. Dear Mr. Gray: - I am advised that you have received the agree- ment signed by President J. H. Lyons and Presj- - dent Charles J. MacGowan, dated January 12, 1954 an identical communication which was sent to the National Joint Board. In accordance with Article III, Section 2 of the Agreement creating the Joint Board, I hereby _ attest to this agreement, : It is my understanding that the two organizations intend to print the agreement in convenient form in the near future. Very truly yours, = (Signed) JoHN T. DUNLOP = _ €Chairman JTD:thw National Joint Board 74 September 13, 1954 Wm. J. McSorley, General President Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers International. Union Ambassador Hotel Los Angeles, Calif. Dear Sir and Brother: At your request and in order to avoid any mis- understandings with the Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers International Union, the undersigned wish to advise that Section 1, captioned “Wire Mesh” of the Memorandum of Agreement dated September 23, 1953, entered into between the Jnternational Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental - Iron Workers and the International Brotherhoed———— of Boilermakers, Iron-Ship- Builders, Blacksmiths, . Forgers and Helpers is not intended and does not apply to the erection of light iron furring or metal lath used to receive plaster. Featerisily yours,. (Signed). WM. A. CaLvin, International President, International Brotherhood of + Boilermakers, Iron Ship Builders, Blacksmiths, Forgers:‘and Helpers (Signed) J. H. Lyons, General President, ‘ : ‘ International Association of Bridge, Structural and Ornamental Iror Workers 75 e : -¥ Asbestos Workers—Bricklayers Boiler Wall Construction January 28, 1954 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE INTERNA-’ TIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HEAT AND FROST. INSULATORS AND ASBESTOS _ WORKERS AND THE ‘BRICKLAYERS,. -MASONS AND PLASTERERS’ INTERNA- TIONAL UNION OF AMERICA. (1) This agreement covers the installation and application of all.insulating materials on boiler wall — construction. (2) In the application of insulating materials over the boiler walls after. same is completed, when said insulation is applied in one continuous opera- tion and not in.conjunction with the refractory _ ‘material, this is the work of members of the Inter- national Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers. (3) In cases where the insulation on the out- side of the boiler walls is applied in conjunction with refractory materials as it progresses: (scaf- fold high), said insulation is the work of members - of the Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers’ Inter- national Union of America. (4) In the event that a dispute over the applica- tion of this agreement cannot be settled locally, there shall be no stoppage of work, and the dispute 76 shall be referred to the headquarters of both Inter- national Unions for settlement. all. International Association of Heat and Frost anaetors and Asbestos Workers: (Signed) JosepH A.- MULLANEY. HuGH E. MULLIGAN. | _C. W. SICKLEsS. Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers’ International Union of America: , (Signed) Harry C. BATES. , JOHN J. MURPHY. THOMAS F. MURPHY. A. J. CLELAND. Attested: JoHN T. DuNLop, Chairman, National Joint Board for Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes. Feburary 2, 1954. 77 DECISIONS OF A.F.OF L, ° .DECISION OF AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR IN RE ISSUANCE OF CHAR. 40 Park Avenue, ‘Chicago, Tl). Dear Sir and Brother: Today, Brothers Feeney and Havenstrite, of your organization, called at this office -and requested a definite statement regarding matters of jurisdiction of your International Union. _ ° Of Course, you are aware that the same subject ican Federation of Labor, the following claims: to work were embodied in your application: - “The assembling of al] elevator machinery, to wit: Hydraulic steam, electric, belt and compressed air; also assembling and building escalators, or traveling stairways; the assembling of all cars com- plete; putting up all uides, either of wood or iron; the setting of all tanks, whether pressure, open or pit tanks; the setting of all Pumps “(where pumps arrive on job in parts, they are to be assembled by 78 members of this union). All electric work con- nected with car machinery and hoisting, including bells, annunciators and lights; all overhead work; either of wood or iron, and supports for the same when required; the setting of all templets, all in- dicators; all foundations, either of wood or iron, that would take the place of masonry; the assem- bling of all hydraulic -parts in connection ‘with elevators; all locking devices in connection with elevators; the boring, drilling and ‘sinking of all plunger elevators; all link belt carriers, and all — _work in general pertaining to the erection and equipment of an elevator complete.” Prior to issuance of the charter to your or- ganization, claims to jurisdiction were made by sev- eral organizations of some classes of work which were not allowed. Then an’ agreement was reached between the representatives of the International . Union of Elevator’ Constructors and the Interna- tional Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, by which your organization yielded to the electrical workers the following classes of work: “The electrical work on flashlights, electrical annunciators and lamps, and feed wires to the controller.” With that reservation, and with those claims made by your organization to jurisdiction, the-charter was issued by the American Federation of Labor. _ Fraternally yours, (Signed) SAMUEL GOMPERS, . President American Federation of Labor 79 DECISION OF THE AMERICAN FEDERA- TION OF LABOR IN RE JURISDICTION © OF ENGINEERS. (Decision Norfolk, Va., Convention, Amevican Federation of Labor, November 11-23, 1907, — No. 124.) ; ‘Resolved, That. hoisting and portable. local unions. of the International Union of Steam Engineers have jurisdiction over the motive power of" all derricks, cement-mixers,. hod-hoists, pumps, .and other ma- chines used on construction Work and be it further Resolved, That the Building Trades organita- tions be requested to give all the assistance pogsible ‘to. the Hoisting and Portable Locals of the I. U. _S. E. in maigtaining the scale of wages now paid on / this work. “ This shall not, however, be construed as’ prevent- ing the International. Brotherhood of E ectrical Workers from using a hand or electric. winch for the purpose pf pulling wire or cable through con- duitg, nor thé wiring and repairing of all electrical * appliances. DECISION OF AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR ELECTRICAL WORKERS— ENGINEERS. : ° (Decision Cincinnati, Ohio, Convention, American Federation . . of Labor, June 1922.) That the electrical installation, electrical repairs, overhauling of general electrical apparatus in gen- erating stations, substations and the operating of exclusively electrical-driven machines in the afore- mentioned plants or stations also that the operation a . e na \ é . e ; . - . of traveling or other electri? cranes for shop or fac- tory purposes shall be Electrical Workers *work. “This decision is not to interfere with the juris- diction of the Steam and Operating Engineers over operating steam-generating plants, electric hoists in building construction or electric ghovels. “These conclusions: are not intended to disturb any other conditions obtained that are mutually. satisfactory at this, time, or that have been provided for by past action of ,the American Federation of Labor which are not in conflict with this decision. “i DECISION OF AMERIC-AN FEDERATION OF LABQR IN. RE‘ DISPUTE BETWEEN _ TEAMSTERS AND IRON WORKERS. The following is a decision . of jurisdiction dispute : existing between the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, @hauffeurs, Stablemen and Helpers of ‘America, and the Bridge’ and Structural Iron, Workers’ International Union, rendered by an Ar- bitration’ Committee appointed by ‘the Executive Council and adopted by the Convention of the American Federation of Labor ns in Portland, Oreg., October, 1923: “It is clearly evident that the Bridge and Struc- tural Iron Workers” International Union has grad- ually and persistently encroached upon the jurisdic- tion of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Stablemen and Helpers of America. It has constantly endeavored to broaden the juris- diction by claimin®, and in some instances practi ing the rights to load and unload materials off and on wagons, trucks and automobiles. In the opinion of the Committee, this work cleamly belongs to the apeeran tional Brotherhood " of Teamsters, Chauf- 817 feurs, Stablemen and, Helpers of America. This “work was conceded to this organization through its charter of affiliation with the A. F. of L. All load- . ing,-hauling and unloading of materials on and off wagons, trucks and automobiles belong to the In-. ternational’ Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Stablemen and Helpers of America. However, where building material is hauled to buildings under construction and the foreman, contractor, or person in charge of the erection of the building, directs that it be hoisted from the wagon, truck or automobile, such hoisting shall be done by the members of the Bridge and Structural Iron Workers’ International organization. Where it is leaded from the wagon, truck or automobile on the ground, street or side- - walk, such work shall be done by the members of - the Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffe , Stable- men and Helpers of Anrerica.” & ‘DECISION OF AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR IN RE ERECTION OF ECON. OMIZERS. (Decision El Paso, Tex., Convention, American Federation of Labor, November 17-25, 1924.) in the controversy existing between the Brother- hood of Boiler Makers and the United Association of Plumbers and Steam Fitters over the erection of economizers, the decision is that in the opinion of the Executive Council the work belongs to the United Association of Plumbers and Steam Fitters. United Association of Journeymen Plumbers and : Steamfitters ; ‘ By the decisions of the American Federation of Labor, rendered at both the Atlanta and Rochester 82 conventions, the substance of this. action of these “conventions of the American Federation of Labor was that there was only reom far one organization in the pipefitting industry. And, that the United Association of Journeymen Plumbers and Steam- fitters is recognized as the only organization hav- ing complete ¢gntrol of the pipefitting trade and industry in its entirety throughout the United States and Canada. oneal , Following are the official decisions of the Amer- ican Federation of Labor: Atlanta Decision The Atlanta Convention of the American Fed- eration of Labor, held in Atlanta, Ga., November 13 to 25, inclusive, 1911, declared “that both for har- mony and practicability the pipefitting trade should be represented in the American Federation. of Labor, also in the Building. Trades Department, by one general association of the pipefitting in- dustry, namely the United Association of Plumbers, Gas Fitters, Steamfitters and Steamfitters’ Helpers of the United States and Canada, and further, that the Executive Council of the Building Trades De- partment be requested to carry. that declaration into effect.” (See page 339 of the 1912 Rochester Con- vention proceedings.) : Rochester. Decision The Adjustnient Committee’s report to the dele- gates assembled at the Rochester Convention of the American Federation. of “Labor, held . at Rochester, N. Y., November 11 to 23, inclusive, 1912, is as: follows: Your committee reports that it has considered . carefully the efforts made by the Executive Coun- 83 cil of the American Federation of Labor to carry out and make effective the ‘instructions of the Atlanta‘ Convention, which declared that: both for harmony and practicability the pipefitting trade © should be represented in the American Federation of Labor, also in the Building Trades Department, by one general association of the pipefitting in- dustry, namely, the United Association of Plumb- ers, Gas Fitters, Steamfitters and Steamfitters’ Helpers of the United States and Canada. 84 ns e DECISIONS RENDERED BY THE NATIONAL BOARD FOR JURISDICTIONAL AWARDS IN THE BUILDING INDUSTRY, —— "| Air Coolers, Air) Washers and Blowers, Consist- “ing of the Assembling of Sheet Metal : and Pipe Fitting DECISION RENDERED MARCH 11, 1920 (Subject of dispute between the Amalgamatéd Sheet ‘ Metal Workers’ International Alliance and the United ‘Association of Plumbers and Steamfitters.) The following agreement between the Amalga- nated Sheet Metal Workers’ International Alliance ind the United Association of Plumbers and Steam- itters was confirmed: September 9, 1918. The undersigned committee, appointed by the reneral Presidents of their respective International - rganizations namely, the United Association of ‘lumbers, Steamfitters and Steamfitters’ Helpers. nd the Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers’ Inter- ~ ational Alliance, held joint conferences in the City . f New York, beginning September 5, 1918, in an ndeavor to arrive at an agreement concerning air ashers, fans, blowers, the housing of same, and 1e pipe fitting on same. . After lengthy meetings participated jn by all of ie undersigned, representing the Joint Conference ommittee of both International Unions, the fol- wing has been agreed to: SECTION 1. That all ahieck metal work of No. 10 : 85 gauge, or lighter, when used in air washers, fans, blowers, or on the housing of same, shall be recog- nized as being the work of the members of the Amalgamated Sheet Metal Workers’ International Alliance. Sec. 2. That all pipe fitting in connection with the above first section shall be recognized as being the work of the Steamfitters, members of the United Association of Journeymen Plumbers, Steamfitters and Steamfitters’ Helpers. ; Sec. 3. It being thoroughly understood by all of the undersigned that all the assembling and erecting of the work as defined in Section One, shall be the work of the members of the Sheet Metal Workers’ International Alliance, excepting pipe fitting of all kinds, which shall be the work’ of the - Steamfitters and Steamfitters’ Helpers of the . United Association. Sec. 4. This agreement shall become effective and in full operation for all parties concerned be- ginning November 1, 1918. Signed for Sheet: Metal Workers this 9th day of September, 1918: jauics LENNON, Gen. Org., | R. PATTISON, Chairman, W. M. O’BRIAN, Secretary,. WoM._H. Lyons, . THOS. WALSH, Epw. P. O’NEIL. Signed for United Association: ‘ E. W. LEONARD, Go. iid . CHARLES M. RAU, RICHARD P. ‘WALSH, A. P. JOHNSON,- Leo A. MURPHY. 86... Low Pressure Heat (Subject of dispute between the United Association. of Plumbers and Steamfitters , and the International Union of Steam Engineers in the Matter of maintaining tem- porary heat while’structure is in course of construction. ) DECISION RENDERED MARCH 11, 1920 In the matter of the controversy between the en- gineer and steamfitter on the question of low pres-. sure heat during completion of the heating system jurisdiction shall rest with the steamfitters until the initial test is completed, immediately after which time, whenever necessary to maintain heat, a sta- tionary engineer shall be. employed: either by the contractor or the owner. a - Low Pressure Heat (Rehearing) (Subject of ,dispute between International Union: of Steam Engineers and United Association. of Journeymen Plumbers and Steamfitters.) * ; DECISION RENDERED AUGUST 2, 1923 — In the matter of the controversy between the en- gineers and steamfitters on the question of low pressure heat during the completion of the heating system while. the building is under construction, jurisdiction shall rest with the ‘steamfitters until the general test has been made and the work ac- cepted by the owner or his agent. Pipe Railing or Guards for Enclosures, Stair- : ways, Hatches, etc. (Subject of dispute between the Bridge and Structural Tron Workers’ International’ Association and the United Associ- ation of Plumbers and Steamfitters. Claimed by the Iron Workers entirely except when not used as a conduit for 87 7 DECISION RENDERED MaRcH 11, 1920 Pipe railing consisting of standard-size cut and threaded pipe, not used in connection with struc- tural or ornamental iron work, - is awarded to Plumbers. and Steamfitters. INTERPRETATION RENDERED SEPTEMBER 15, 1920 “Iron pipe railing consisting of a preponderance * of slip-joints made rigid with or without set-screws, pinions or rivets, supported by a threaded joint and flange at base or walls, is the work of the Iron Workers. Where, however, the preponderance of joints is of standard-sized cut and threaded iron pipe, it belongs to the Plumbers and Steamfitters.” Re-enforced Concrete, Cement and Floor . Construction ; (Subject of dispute between the Bridge and Structural Iron Workers’ International Association and the Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers’ International Union.) DECISION RENDERED MARCH 11, 1920 ‘In the matter of the controversy between the Iron orkers and Lathers over re-enforced concrete construction, it is decided that all iron and steel used for re-enforcement in re-enforced concrete, cement and floor construction be awarded to the Iron Workers. In such cities-and localities as are covered. by existing agreements with employers awarding Lathers control over re-enforced concrete construc- tion, these agreements are to be maintained invio- late until the date of their expiration, after which this decision shall prevail. . 88 INTERPRETATION RENDERED DECEMBER 4, 1920. In the interpretation of this Board’s decision of March 11, 1920, in the matter of the controversy between the Iron Workers and Lathers over re- enforced concrete construction, it is not to be un- derstood as abrogating, setting aside or in any way altering the decision of the Rochester Convention ~ of the Building Trades Department, November 29, 1912, awarding jurisdiction over Hy-rib Lath to the Lathers, and it is to.be understood that the placing of Hy-rib Lath or any ribbed metal lath, however it may be used, comes within the jurisdiction of the Lathers. VitroTite and Similar Opaque Glass (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers’ International Union and the Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and Paperhangers.) : DECISION RENDERED MARCH 11, 1920 ' That in the matter of the controversy between the Painters and Bricklayers on the subject herewith referred to, jurisdiction over the setting of vitrolite and similar opaque glass is awarded to the Brick- layers. 72s Vitrolite and Similar Opaque Glass (Rehearing) (Subject of dispute between’ the, Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers’ International Union and the Brotherhood - of Painters, Decorators and Paperhangers.) DECISION RENDERED MAY 26, 1924 It is the opinion of the Board that the foregoing decision of March 11, 1920, is intended to convey to the Bricklayers all counters and lavatories con- structed of vitrolite or carrara glass and such glass when used in mural decorations on buildings in 89 place of marble or other stone or used in conjunc- tion with marble pr other stone as panels gn. counters. It is the further opinion of the Board that the foregoing: decision is intended to convey all vitro-\ lite, opalite, white opal and other opaque glass in- \ ‘stalled on false work, furring strips, walls, ceilings, partitions or columns, secured with screw rosettes, molding, putty, expansion, toggle bolts or screws, to the Painters. , _ The agreement of December 5, 1910, which was concurred in by the Board of Awards on July 12, 1922, remains’ in effect, and any disputes that may arise in connection with the subject of the agree- ment with the Board’s decisions shall be adjusted in accordance with the provisions contained in Sec- | tions 3 and 4 of the agreement. ; Asbestos Plaster for Boiler Rooms, etc. (Subject. of dispute between the, Operative Plasterers and Cement Finishers’ International Association and the Inter- national Association ‘of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers.) DECISION RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920 In the dispute between the Asbestos Workers and Plasterers on the matter of plastering boiler rooms, etc., it is decided that the insulation and finishing coat on ceilings with asbestos and other insulating material, where the groundwork has been prepared and installed by the Asbestos Workers, shall, in- _ eluding the application of insulating ‘material on boilers, tanks, vats, etc., be awarded to the Asbestos _Worker. ©. 7 . Light Iron Furring, Brackets, Clips, Hangers, Corner Guards, Beads and Metallic Lath ’ (Subject of dispute between the International Union of Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers and the International, Association of . « . Bridge and Structural lron Workers.) _ (Award .of the Denver Convention, Building Trades Depart- ment, A. F. of L., adopted -November, 1908. See printed proceedings, Pages 69 to 71, inclusive.) DECISION RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920 y In the matter of dispute between the- Interna- tional Union of Wood, Wire-and Metal Lathers and the International Association of Bridge and Struc- tural Iron Workers referred to in the foregoing title, the following award is concurred in: “After going into an extended hearing of the jurisdiction claims of both organizations, your com- mittee recommends that the erection and installa- tion of all light iron work, such as light iron fur- ring, brackets, clips, hangers, steel corner guards or beads,*. and metallic lathing of all descriptions be- long solely to the Lathers. ~ at “This does not give the right, however, to the Lathers ‘to install or erect any other iron work . than as herein specified and outlined. v “This decision is based in conformity with the agreement entered into by the national officers of both organizations and endorsed by the Kansas City Convention of Structural Iron Workers and con- curred in by the Ameri¢an’ Federation of Labor.” Hy-Rib. Lath In supplement of the foregoing decision the Roch- ester Convention of the Building Trades Depart- ment, November 29, 1912, awarded jurisdiction over Hy-rib Lath to the Lathers. (Note interpretation rendered December 4, 1920, re-enforced Concrete, Cement and Floor Construction.) f — .] * Note the following decision. 91 ae Metallic Corner Beads When Set in Plastic 0 Material — oy. ; (Subject of dispute between_tbhe Operative Plasterers and Cement Finishers’ International Association and the Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers’ International Union.) a DECISION RENDERED MARCH 11, 1920 A the In the matter of the controversy between Plasterers and Lathers on the question of the adher- ence of corner beads, by plastic material, it is the opinion of the Board that deserved consideration was not given the subject when the previous deci- ” sion was reached. It is therefore agreed that the. Plasterers are awgfded jurisdiction over sticking with plastic matefial metallic corner beads. Acetylene and Electric Welding memorandum. ) DECISION RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920 In the matter of the dispute referred to. in the foregoing title, as approved by the Philadelphia © Convention sof the Building Trades Department, A..F. of L. November, 1914 (see printed proceed- ings, Page 99), the following agreement is con- curred in: , “Representatives of the Electrical Workers, Sheet Metal Workers, Iron Workers, Plumbers and og cpanel and Machinists mutually agreed to the foilowing decision: . . _ “Each trade to have jurisdiction over all acety- ‘lene and electric ‘welding when such process is used to perform the_work of their respective trades.” Bronzing and Painting of’Radiators and Pipe ‘Connections © | (Subject of - dispute between the Brotherhood of Painters, . Decorators-and Pgperhangers and the United Associtaion of Plumbers and Steamfitters. ) . 92 ay . ¢ P : eee Ps _ (Subject of dispute between the trades named in the following a (Award of Rochester Convention, Building Trades Department, A. F. of L., adopted November 29, 1912. See Page 141, ‘printed proceedings. ) \ D DECISION RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920 In the matter of the subject referred to in the J foregoing title, the following award is concurred in: Resolved, That the United Association of Plumb- : ers and Steamfitters be and is instructed to require f _ that its affiliated unions desist from further tres- . pass upon the jurisdiction of the Brotherhood of . Painters, Decorators and Paperhangers of America, and when and where necessary to notify their em- ployers that neither journeymen nor helpers will be permitted to do this work. . Application. of Damp-Resisting Preparations and a Waterproofing (Subject of dispute between United Slate, Tile and Com- position Roofers, Damp and Waterproof..Workers’ Asso- ciation and the Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and Paperhangers. } . ‘DECISION RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920 In‘ the matter of dispute referred to in the. foregoing title, the following agreement is con- “ curred in: Agreement entered into by and between the Brotherhood of Painters, . Decorators and Paper- hangers of America and the United Slate Tile and Composition Roofers, .Damp and Waterproof Workers’ Association, ‘Fifst. That the Painters do not claim the right to apply any of the material claimed by the Slate, Tile and Composition: Roofgrs, Damp and Water. ; proof Workers, except such material as is applied by a brush that is ordinarily used by’the Painters in ; applying the materials covered in their jurisdiction. ~ 93 . ‘’ a ° ~ Second. _That the Slate, Tile and Composition Roofers, Damp and Waterproof Workers do not claim the right to apply any of the material in dispute except when applied by or with a three- knot, long-handled brush, mop or swab, and spray - system employed therein. Erection of Scaffolds as Applied to Building Construction (Subject of dispute between the International Hod Carriers’, Building and Common Laborers’ Union, United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joinerss, Operative Plasterers and Cement Finishers’ International Association and Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers’ International Union. ) DECISION RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920 - - In the matter of the dispute between the Labor- ers, Bricklayers, Plasterers and Carpenters over the erection of scaffolds as applied to building construc- : tion, it is agreed that the erection and removal of ° all: scaffolds, including. trestles and horses used primarily by Lathers, Plasterers, Bricklayers and Masons, shall be done by the mechanics and labor- ers in these trades as directed by the employer. Self-supporting scaffolds over fourteen feet in height or any special designed scaffolds or thosé - built for special purposes shall be built by the - Carpenters.: The making of horses and: trestles other than _ temporary is the work of the Carpenter. Marble and Slate Partitions, Backs and Floor Slabs for Urinal Stalls, Closets, and . Showers, Setting of _—> (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers’ International Union and the United Association of Plumbers and Steamfitters.) . (Award of — Convention, Building Trades Department, 94 : i ‘ . A.F. of L. adopted November 28, 1912. -See ‘Page 132, printed proceedings. Award of Buffalo Convention, Novem- ber 9, 1917. See Page 92, printed proceedings.) DECISION RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920 Ip the matter of the subject referred to in the foregoing title, the following award is concurred in: Resolved, That the setting of floor slabs, backs, . partitions of urinal stalls, closets and shower baths properly belong to the Bricklayers. The foregoing decision does not. concede to the Bricklayers the right to install marble work that is: - connected with the water supply or sewer or water- tight work regularly catalogued as plumbing fix- tures. - Muslin and Canvas for Decorative Parpests. Tacking of .~ (Subject of dispute between the Brotherhood of Painters, Dec- orators and Paperhangers and the I. A. Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers.) ’ (Award of Buffalo Convention, Building Trades Department, A. F. of L.,. adopted ovember 10, 1917. See Page 108, printed proceedings. ) DECISION RENDERED - APRIL 28, 1920 In the matter of the subject referred to in the foregoing title, the following award is concurred in: Resolved, That this convention notify and in- struct the officers of the Asbestos Workers’ Inter- national Union that the tacking of all muslin and canvas for decorative purposes is the jurisdictio= of the Painters and that they instruct their members , to refrain from doing any of this work. . - Pile Driving Machinery and Engines, Operation of , (Award. of Buffalo Convention, Building Trades ‘Departme A. F. of L., adopted November, 1917. See Pages 59 and 05, printed proceedings. ) 95 om DECISION RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920. .In the matter’ of the subject referred to in the foregoing title, the following award is concurred in: ~ Such workmen as are employed in the operation of engines or.machinery in connection .with a pile driver come under the jurisdiction of the Engineers. ~ Sheet Metal Glazing for Sash, 7, Doors, Skylights, etc. -. (Subject of dispute between the Brotherhood ef Painters, Dec- orators and Paperhangers and Sheet Metal Workers’ Inter- national Association.) . DECISION .RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920 In the matter of the dispute referred to in the foregoing title, the following agreement is con- curred in: _ Agreement entered into by and between the Gen- eral Executive Board of the Brotherhood of Paint- ‘ers, Decorators and Paperhangers of America, and the Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association — shall take effect December 1, 1910, and remain in force until amended, revised or. changed ° at a meeting -between the representatives ‘of both organ- izations called for this purpose. SECTION 1. It is agreed by both oti to this agreement that all glass set in sheet metal sash, frames, doors or skylights, shall be set by Painters, according to their claim of jurisdiction granted by the convention of the Building Trades Department, oi: F. of L., at St. Louis, December, 1910; and that “all sheet’ metal work on sheet metal ‘sash, frames, doors, or skylights shall be done by Sheet Metal | Workers. SEc. 2. In ‘localities where differences now exist or may arise in the future, such differences shall be 96 : Were Ya etree ee CO a a ' adjusted by a committee appointed by and repre- senting the district councils or local unions of both organizations in that locality. Should this commit- © tee be unable to agree, a representative of the Gen- eral Executive Board of each organization shall be called in to assist in the adjustment. SEC. 3..It is also agreed that the national officers _ of both organizations where local unions fail to agree shall insist that this agreement be carried out by affiliated unions. Slate Treads When Set on Iron Stair Case — (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- terers’ International Union and the International Association of Bridge and Structural Iron Workers.) In the matter of the subject referred to in the foregoing title, the following award is concurred in: DECISION RENDERED APRIL 28, 1920 Slate treads on iron stairs having provoked a dis- ' pute in jurisdiction between the organizations above ‘named, was submitted to the Executive Council November 20, 1909. The action taken follows: . The Executive Council of the Building Trades ’ Department, on being called upon for a decision; awarded the work in question (slate treads) to the Bricklayers. ; S Unskilled Labor, with Special Reference to the. Loading and Unloading of Material as Applied to_Re-enforced Concrete Construction (Subject of dispute between the International Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers’ Union and International Association of Bridge and Structural Iron Workers.) 97 a . a DECISION RENDERED AUGUST 2, 1920 AMENDED DECEMBER 11, 1924 It is the decision of the Board that the loading and unloading, carrying and handling of al] rods and materials for use in re-enforcing concrete con-| “struction shall be done by laborers under the super- vision of such persons as the employer may desig- nate The hoisting of rods shall be done by laborers, except when a derrick or outrigger operated by other than hand-power is used. This decision ap- plies only to the character of work stipulated herein. In such localities where existing agreements pro- vide otherwise, this decision is to. become affective at the expiration thereof. Defects in Concrete Caused by Leakage, Bulging, Sagging, etc., Through Defective or Shifting Forms (Subject of dispute between the Operative Plasterers and Cement Finishers’ International Association and the In- ternational Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers’ Union.) DECISION RENDERED AUGUST 2, 1920 . When finishing tools are not used or required, the work shall be done by the laborer. The filling of voids and other work requiring patching, where finishing tools are used and re- ° quired, shall be done by the cement finisher. . Setting and Alignment of Tile and Porcelain Bathroom Accessories © (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- ~ terers’ International Union and the United Association of Plumbers and Steamfitters.) DECISION RENDERED DECEMBER 4, 1920" In the matter of controversy between the Tile 98 Layers and Plumbers over setting and Alignment of Tile and Porcelain Bathroom Accessories, it is decided that all bath and toilet room accessories made of clay products, built-in tile-faced walls, shall be the work of the tile setter. Anchors for Bathroom Accessories (Subject of dispute between the Brieklayers, Masons and Plas- terers’ .International Union and the United Association of Plumbers and Steamfitters.) ‘DECISION RENDERED NOVEMBER 14, 1923 All bathroom accessories, except those covered. by decision rendered December 4, 1920, placed after finished tile wall surfaces are completed, shall be set by Plumbers and Steamfitters. -When anchors for bathroom accessories are built into finished tile wall construction, the setting of same shall be done by Bricklayers and Masons and when any such anchors are placed after finished tile wall surfaces are completed, the work shall be done by Plumbers and Steamfitters. * Jurisdiction Over Foremen on Sateriox Concrete olumns, Foundations for Engine anf Machinery Beds (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- terers’ International Union, International Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers’ Union and the Operative | Plasterers and ‘Cement Finishers’ International Associa- tion.) DECISION RENDERED DECEMBER 4, 1920 In thé matter of the jurisdiction over Foremen on Interior Concrete Columns, Foundations for En- gine and Machinery Beds as contested by the Brick- ‘layers, Hod Carriers and Plasterers, it is the deci- sion of the Board that the work shall be done by the Laborers under the supervision of such skilled workmen as the employer may désignate. . 99 . “Blectrical’ Work on Elevators (Rehearing) (Subject of dispute between the International Brotherhood of , Electrical, Workers and the International Union of Elevator Constructors. ) . DECISION RENDERED DECEMBER i; 1920 REVISED AND AMENDED FEBRUARY 2, 1927 In the matter of dispute between the Elevator Constructors and the Electrical Workers on the -’ question of all electrical work on elevators, it is agreed that the electrical work involved in the in- stallation of signal systems, fans, telephones, elec- tric light fixtures, illuminated thresholds and feed wires to the controller on all elevators is the work of the Electrical Workers; also the electrical work. in connection with interlocking devices on other than automatic elevators is awarded to the Elec- trical Workers. ; The term “automatic elevator,” as used in this award, includes the full automatic, double push- button single control and department store — elevators. Bishopric Board, When Apple as a Substitute for Lath and Sheathing (Subject of dispute between the United Brotherhood of Car- penters and Joiners and the International vain of Wood, Wire and Metal Lathera, ) DECISION RENDERED DECEMBER 4, 1920 In the matter of the dispute over the installation of Bishopric Board when applied as a substitute for lath, it is the decision of the Board that.the work . shall be done by the Lathers; where the same is used for sheathing it shall be the _work of the ae penters. 100 Flaxlinum Keyboard Insulation (Subject of dispute betweeff the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners and the International Union of Wood, Wire and Metal Lathers.) DECISION RENDERED DECEMBER 4, 1920 In the matter of the dispute over the installation of Flaxlinum Keyboard and Insulation, it is the decision of the Board that when the same is used as a substitute for lath or when any plastic ma- terial is to be applied, the work shall be done by the Lathers; when Flaxlinum is used as insulation or sheathing it shall be the work of the Carpenters. Installation of Metal Windows (Subject of dispute between the Sheet Metal Workers’ Inter- national Association and the: International Association of Bridge and Structural Iron Workers.) . DECISION RENDERED May 5, 1926 The installation of. metal windows having cast- iron sills and cast-iron head blocks or in which three or more of the structural parts—that is, the sills, heads, jambs and mullions—are heavier than ten-guage, shall be the work of the Iron Workers; otherwise it shall be the work of the Sheet Metal Workers. ; Hoisting, Lowering and Placing of Elevator: Machinery ‘(Subject of dispute between the Eleyator Constru€tors’ Inter- national Union and the International Association of Bridge and Structural Iron Workers.) : DECISION RENDERED FEBRUARY 7, 1922 In the matter of the dispute between the Elevator . Constructors and Bridge and Structural Iron Work- . ers referred to in the’ foregoing title, it is décided 101; that the Elevator Constructors be awarded the hoisting,. lowering and placing of elevator ma-_ chinery. ; 7 Glazing as Hereinafter Described (Agreement for avoidance of dispute between Brotherhood of — Painters, Decorators and Paperhangers and Bricklayers, Ma- sons and Plasterers’ International Union as endorsed by. Building Trades Department, A. F. of L.) DECISION RENDERED JULY 12, 1922 - In the matter of the subject referred to in the ~ foregoing title, it is the. decision of the Board that the following agreement be concurred in: Agreement entered into by and between the Gen- eral Executive Board of the Brotherhood of Paint- ers, Decorators and Paperhangers of America, and the General Executive Board of the Bricklayers, « ‘Masons and Plasterers’ International Union shall take effect December 5, 1910 and remain in force until amended, revised: or changed at a meeting be- ° tween the representatives of both organizations called for this purpose, . SECTION 1. It is agreed by both parties to ‘this agreement that all plate and window glass, mirrors, . beveled plate, rough, ribbed, wire, figured, colored, or art glass set in sash, frames, doors or skylights _eonstructed of wood, sheet metal, iron, stone, or other material and set with putty or moulding, shall be set by Painters, and that where glass is used as a substitute for ceramic, mosaic, or encaustic tile, and set on floors, walls and ceilings in mortar, ce- ment or other plastic material used to secure such . ‘tile in position, shall be set by Bricklayers when cut to size and shape for setting. It is further agréed by the Bricklayers that all glass delivered on ‘ jobs in stock sheets shall be cut to the required. size- by the painters. : 102 SEc. 2. It is agreed by both parties to this agree- ment that all plate and window glass, mirrors, beveled plate, rough, ribbed, wire, figured, colored,’ or art glass set in sash, frames, doors or skylights constructed of wood, sheet metal, iron, stone or other material and set with putty or moulding, shall be set by the Painters, and that where glass is used as a substitute for marble in interior finish or deco- . ration, and is éarved, cut, polished or rubbed, shall be set. by the Bricklayers. SEc. 3. Should any differences arise regarding the work as covered by this agreement, a committee appointed by and representing the district council or local union of each organization in. that locality, . shall meet and adjust such differences. Should the . committees of the local unions fail to agree, an executive officer of each international union shall be requested to attend ahd assist in the adjustment. Sec. 4. It is further agreed that.the national offi- cers of both organizations shall insist that all agree- ments entered into shall be carried out by affiliated unions.. _ Operation of Elevators for Hoisting Materials - (Decision of St. Louis Convention, Building Trades Depart- ment, A. F. of L., adopted December, 1910. See printed proceedings, Page 128.)/ J ; DECISION RENDERED JULY 12, 1922 In the matter of ‘the subject referred to in the foregoing title, the following decision is concurred in: : 7 4 fs The operation of elevators of all kinds when used . for hoisting any material used in the construction of buildings is hereby conceded to the Hoisting En- 103 t ‘ 6 - gineers affiliated with the InteFmations Union ) Steam Engineers. * ; lead , Corrugated Sheeting (Subject of pute. between Interneticnel Association “of. _ Bridge and Strpetural Iron, Workers add .Sheet Metal Workers’, — A’sociation.) . DECISION RENDERED MAY 26, “1928 _ > ‘The erestion of corrugated: metal eu on steel frames construction when the sheets are” mired end and side lapped is the work of the Iron orkers; the erection of all other corrugated metal sheeting ‘of No. 10 gauge or raat is the work of the Sheet Metal Workers. ’ Derricks, Erection and Handling for Setting Stone (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- . terers’ International Union and International Association of _Bridge and Structural Iron Workers.) DECISION RENDERED May 26, 1923 “ _ The stonesetter shall have sole jurisdiction over hand. derricks in connection with the’ setting of stone. - : - The erection and operation of power derricks for setting stone shall be dotie by the Iron Workers under the direct.’supervision of the stone sette? who shall determine the number of nien to be em- ployed. ~ Artifical Stone—~Granite (Dressing, Altering and — Finishing) (Subject of dispute between Granite Cutters’ scoceuiied Association and Journeymeén Stone Cutters Association. DECISION RENDERED MAY 26, 1923 ~ _ In the matter of dispute- between the Granite Cutters’ International Association and the Journey- 104°: wll ae . men Stone Cutters’ Association relative to artificial . stone, the dressing, altering and ‘finishing of arti- ° ficial stone, casGn imitation of natural stone, ig the work of the Stone Cutters, except that when any such artificial stone, by reason of hardness of tex- - ture requires the use of granite cutters’ tools for the proper dressing, altering or finishing, it is the “work of the Granite Cutters. Flat-fate Tile : (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- terers’ International Union and United Slate, Tile and Com- position Reofeys, Damp and Waterproof Workers’ Associa- ‘tion.) “« . an | . *, DECISION RENDERED May 26, 1923 - In the matter of dispute referfed to in the fore- going title, the following agreement is concurred in: ‘ Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers’ International : Union . . e* v8, . United Slate, Tile and Composition Roofers, ‘Damp. . and Waterproof Workers Association ' Agreement enteréd into this 21st day of Febru- . ary, 1911, amended May 26, 1923, by and between ‘duly accredited representatives of the grganizations above named, to-wit: ; ; , Jurisdiction is hereby. concedefl the Bricklayers bat the.laying or setting of flat-faced tile of every /éescription when’ laid in.mortar on all flat roofs or promenade roofs. . Jurisdiction ‘is hereby conceded’ the Slate, Tile. and Composition Roofers, Damp and Waterproof Workers over flat-faced tile of every deseription, and corrugated tile, when laid in any preparation - ‘of asphalt.on roofs, flat or otherwise. . . - ~?* * 16 ' | oe a “sy. . ; a ; ; tated | ~ , . : , _ . . . a Foremanship Over Concrete Construction (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- terers’ International Union, International.Hod Carriers’ Building and Common Laborers’ Union and Operative Plas- terers and Cement Finishers’ tarebnantapial Association. ) — RENDERED May 26," 1923 MENDED FEBRUARY 2], 1924 EVISED ‘DECEMBER 11, 1924 In the matter of dispute over concrete construc- tion, it is decided the work shall be done by laborers Condes’ Base, Installation of | " (Subject of dispute bétween International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association. ) ‘DECISION RENDERED Avcust 2, 1923 In the matter of. the controversy between the - Electrical Workers and the Sheet Metal Workers as to the installation of conduo base, itis decided that the installation of conduo base is “the work of the Saat. Metal Workers. Setting .of Alberene Stone Slabs Used. as Drain Boards or Backs in Connection with Sinks ’ (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- terers’ International Union and the United Association of Plumbers and Steamfitters.) -_ DECISION RENDERED NOVEMBER 14, 1923° ‘In the matter of the controversy between the ,Bricklayers and.Masons and the Plumbers and Steam Fitters over the Setting of Alberene Stone Slabs used as Drain Boards or Backs in Connection 106 _under the supervision of such skilled mechanic as - ’ the mnparer may designate. ‘ ‘s ‘with Sinks, it was decided tha: the setting of Alber- ene stone slabs used as drain boards or backs in connection with sinks is the work of Plumbers and Steamfitters. 7 Gunnite Work or Handling of Cement Gun (Subject of dispute between the International Hod Carriers, Building and Common Laborers’ Union, Operative Plas- terers and Cement Finishers’ International Association and Bricklayers, Masons and Plasterers’ International Union.) ‘ DECISION RENDERED FEBRUARY 21, 1924 In the matter of the dispute referred to in the foregoing title,.the following decision was reached: When work to be performed is to be of the thickness of one and one-hdlf inches or greater, the handling of the cement gun shall be done by the Laborers, When the work is less than one and one-half inches in thickness, the handling and con- trol of the nozzle shall be the work of the Plas- terers and Cement. Finishers. . It is understood that this decision does not allow the Laborers the -right to finish where any finish- ing tools are required. : The application of a coat of. cement mixture by means of the cement gun on steel, as a protection against corrosion is not included’ in this decision. Plastering Work for, Preparation of Wals an Ceilings for’ Tiling - (Subject of dispute between the ‘Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- . terers’ International Union and the Operative Plasterers and Cement Finishers’ International Assoojation.) . 107 DECISION RENDERED FEBRUARY 21, 1924 After reviewing the controversy in its various » phases, the determination is reached that the agree- ment previously existing between the two organ: izations affords the most practical plan. of adjust- ment, and the following award is therefore made’ as the decision of the Board: .. . Plasterers shall prepare or plaster all walls and ceilings which are to receive tile, except the final setting bed, which shall be applied by the Tile Lay- ers; the bath rooms, vestibule and small halls in single private residences shall be plastered by. the Tile Setters, ; ; Concrete Slab Re-enforced (Pre-Cast) for Roof Tiling — (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- , ‘terers’ International Union and the United Slate, Tile and Composition Roofers, Damp and Waterproof Workers’ Association, ) : DECISION RENDERED DECEMBER 11, 1924 Jurisdiction is awarded Slate, Tile and Composi- ¥ tion Roofers, over pre-cast re-enforced concrete slabs for roof tiling when pointed up with or laid upon any preparation of asphalt, roofing cements or other mastics, on roofs, flat. or otherwise. When laid in cement, lime or gypsum mortars, the work is awarded to Bricklayers. Installation of Air Piping in Connection with Elevator Door Locks (Subject of. dispute between the United Association of Plumb- ers and Steamfitters and the International Union of Elevator Constructors. ) DECISION RENDERED NOVEMBER 11, 1925 When the compressor is used only for elevator . work, the*work from the water main to the com- 108 * “ bd nursery wr RRS DETER PRN ORC OT TN a | - pressor and return shall be the work of the plumb- . ers and steamfitters. The elevator constructor shall set the compressor and do all the work between the compressor and the locking -device, but when the compressor is used for other purposes than elevator - work, then the compressor shall be set by the plumbers and steamfitters, and the elevator con- - structor shall do the necessary piping from the compressor to his work only, all other work to be done by the plumbers and steamfitters. ~ Setting, Installing or Sticking of Artificial Stone (Subject of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- terers’ International Union and Operative Plasterers and Cement Finishers’ International Association.) . - - DECISION RENDERED May 5, 1926 It is decided that the setting, installing or. stick- ing of artificial stone, the material base of which is gypsum, plaster of Paris or Keene: cement, resem- bling plaster in character and density, wherever used on the interior of building, whether or not re- inforced with burlap or other ‘fibrous material, re- gardless of color, or whether or not faced with any special cement, whether pre-cast or run in place, is the work of the Plasterers. "8 : Wherever artificial stone, the material base of which is of other cements, which comes pre-cast and resembles the natural stone. in character and density, regardless of color, whether or not faced with any special cement, the work is that of the Bricklayers. % 7 s Cutting of Chases and Channels in Brick, Tile. and other Masonry - (Matter referréd to National Board for Jurisdictional Awards by Executive Council, Building Trades Department.) - _ 109 ' DEcISION-RENDERED May 5, 1926 Inasmuch as no other trades except the Brick- layers, Plumbers and Steamfitters and Electricians have claimed this work, it is decided that the cut- ting of chases and channels in brick, tile and other masonry is the work of the Bricklayers, except that the Plumbers and Steamfitters and Electricians, shall have jurisdiction to do cutting where required for the installation of their respective work. — of Trap Rock Floors by — ‘ ; _ Methods (Subject ‘of dispute between the Bricklayers, Masons and Plas- ‘terers’ International Union and Operative Plasterers and Cement Finishers’ International Association.) DECISION RENDERED May 5, 1926 © The finishing of cement floors where additional aggregate of stone is added by spreading or sprin- kling on top of the finished base and troweled or. rolled into the finish and then the surface ground . by grinding machines, shall be under the jurisdic- . tion of the Terrazzo Workers. When no additional stone or aggregate is added to the finished mixture, even though the surface may be ground, the work - shall be under the jurisdiction of the Cement Fin- - ishers. — _ Jurisdiction Over Operation of Electric and Traveling Cranes During Construction - - . of Building (Subject of dispute between the International Union of Steam and Operating Engineers and International Brotherhood of . Electrical Workers.) (Decision Executive Council, American Federation of Labor, ; March, :1926.) ; - ApopTeD AucustT 4, 1926 “The Executive Council has been, asked for an ———— of decision rendered by the 1922 Che 110 ET ee ee ee cinnati Convention of the American Federation of - _ Labor, as it relates to the jurisdiction of overhead or traveling cranes installed asa permanent fixture . in building while building is under construction and cranes are being used to handle building material r the construction of building and also for the tting of motors, generators and other electrical : equipment. ; a sik: - “The decision provides that the Engineers have jurisdiction over the hoists for building material on . building under construction, and that the Electrical Workers have jurisdiction over the overhead or traveling cranes for shop.or factory purposes. Therefore if the overhead or traveling cranes are used exclusively to handle building material for the building, cranes shall be operated during such con- struction by members of the Steam and Operating Engineers. : : - “If motors and other. electrical equipment are’ being set in place while building is under construc- ‘tion and a crane or cranes are used for such setting, the Engineers shall operate the crane, handling both ‘building material and electrical equipment until 50 per cent of the motors or electrical équipment [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386413_0362%3A11. Public record. Not legal advice.