Masonry Magazine May 1964 Page. 6
tract to install precast concrete exterior wall panels and to perform all the brick work on a proposed eleven-story office building located at 121 Meramec Avenue, Clayton, Missouri, herein refered to as 121 Buildng. The exterior of the 121 Building consists of vertical rows of bricks interspaced with rows of windows. From the second through the tenth floor of the building, precast concrete panels, measuring approximately 5 feet long, 3½ feet wide, and 4 inches thick, serve as dividers between windows on one floor and windows on the floor above. These panels extend above and below the exterior part of the floor. Upon arrival of trucks bringing the panels from their place of manufacture in Des Moines, lowa, the panels were unloaded and hoisted to the floors to be stored until ready for installation. When the brick walls reached a predetermined height, a lintel was set in the brick reaching from one brick column to the other. Mortar was spread on the lintel; the panel, taken from its storage site, was lowered by means of chains and pulleys onto the lintel; and pieces of metal attached to the lintel were fitted into holes in the bottom of the panel. The panel was then plumbed, levelled, and aligned to assure a proper fit, and the mortar, designed to seal any spaces between the lintel and the panel, was raked. The panel was further secured to the building by bolting the panel with two bolts set into the floor and an angle iron set into the panel.
Work commenced on the building in January 1963. Gorman assigned all work connected with the installation and erection of the panels to a composite crew comprised of two to five employees represented by the Iron Workers and one employee repre- sented by the Bricklayers, with the ironworkers performing all of the work described above with the exception of the levelling, plumbing, and aligning of the panels and the laying and raking of the mortar, which was done by the stone masons. The brick walls were erected by other bricklayers employed by Gorman and the windows were installed by glaziers.
In the summer of 1963, the Carpenters, through its International, submitted a dispute to the National Joint Board for the Settlement of Jurisdictional Dis- putes, herein referred to as Joint Board, involving the erection and installation of the panels on the 121 Building, claiming that employees represented by the Carpenters rather than those represented by the Bricklayers were entitled to the work. On August 22, 1963, the Joint Board issued its decision award-
ing the work to the Carpenters. Shortly thereafter, Adams, a business manager of the Carpenters, tele- phoned Gorman's president, and asked if Gorman intended to abide by the Joint Board's decision awarding the work to the Carpenters. Gorman re- plied that it would not. Thereafter, on Friday, Sep- tember 13, 1963, at approximately 2:30 p.m., a picket appeared at the 121 Building carrying a sign which read:
Notice To Public: Stephen Gorman
Bricklaying Co. refuses to abide by
a decision by the Joint Board for
Settlement of Jurisdictional Disputes
of Building Trades Department, AFL-CIO.
and then below,
The Carpenters District Council of
St. Louis, AFL-CIO.
Work continued for the remainder of that day, but on the following Monday, when the picket reap- peared, employees of Gorman as well as employees of other contractors refused to cross the picket line. All employees returned to work after a period of 2 weeks. At the time of the hearing herein, the con- struction of the 121 Building had been completed.
Contentions of the Parties
As noted, both Carpenters and Bricklayers have agreements with Iron Workers that the composite crews doing disputed work should include employees represented by Iron Workers. Gorman and the Brick- layers contend that the assignment by Gorman of stone masons to the composite crew was proper on the grounds that: (1) the assignment was consistent with Gorman's past practice of assigning similar work to a composite crew of ironworkers and stone masons; (2) the assignment was consistent with trade practice throughout the country; (3) the work of erecting and installing the panels requires skills and tools possessed only by stone masons; (4) precast concrete as used for exterior walls is a substitute for precut stone, which has always been installed by stone masons; and (5) Gorman is not bound by decisions of the Joint Board.
The Carpenters contend that the work of erecting and installing the panels should have been assigned to a composite crew including carpenters on the grounds that; (1) the practice in the St. Louis area has been for carpenters to erect and install precast concrete panels; (2) the work of erecting and install- ing the panels requires skills and tools possessed only by carpenters; and (3) the Joint Board has issued a decision awarding the very work in dispute to Car- penters.
The Iron Workers appeared at the hearing but
MASONRY
May, 1964