Masonry Magazine January 1974 Page. 47
1. Certifications
Neither of the labor organizations involved herein has been certified by the Board as the collective-bargaining representative for a unit of the Employer's employees.
2. Collective Bargaining Agreements
There is of record a 1962 agreement between Iron Workers and Bricklayers which would seem to lend support to Iron Workers' claim for a composite crew to do the installation and erection of all types of precast, prestressed concrete stone or imitation stone, or other fabricated masonry units, when installed as wall panels by means of bolting and/or welding to structural steel or concrete framed construction. This agreement, inter alia, gives Iron Workers the work of rigging, hooking on, signaling, and loading.
However, George A. Miller, executive vice president of the Mason Contractors Association, which numbers 1,500 members, is not a party to this agreement and has not abided by it. Miller further testified that, based on his experience nationally in the masonry contract field, the disputed work is traditionally performed by bricklayers with the help of the cement mason tenders who are members of the Laborers International Union.
It is apparent, therefore, that this agreement generally has not been followed in situations involving the assignment and performance of the type of work in dispute. Moreover, assuming arguendo that the agreement was adhered to by both Union Workers and Bricklayers, the Employer never agreed to be bound by it.
In view of the foregoing, we find that little, if any, weight can be given to the Iron Workers-Bricklayers 1962 agreement as a factor in determining the merits of this dispute.
3. Employer Practice
The practice of the Employer, without exception, has been to assign the disputed work to its own employees represented by Bricklayers, with assistance from its own cement masons, who are members of the Laborers International Union.
forums, i.e., in the words of the contract, "to any agency established by law or mutual agreement to settle such disputes." Hence, the contractual language does not require the Employer to submit the instant dispute to the Joint Board. Furthermore, that the parties intended Joint Board submission to be wholly voluntary is consistent with the AGC's, Houston Chapter's, and the Employer's failure to sign the New Joint Board or New Impartial Joint Board agreements.
Accordingly, as the parties' agreement does not provide that the Joint Board is the exclusive forum to resolve disputes of this kind, and is at best ambiguous on this issue, we find that there is no agreed-upon method for the resolution of this dispute and that the dispute is properly before the Board.
E. Merits of the Dispute
Section 10(k) of the Act requires the Board to make an affirmative award of the disputed work after giving due consideration to all relevant factors. As the Board has stated, its determination in a jurisdictional dispute case is an act of judgment based upon commonsense and experience in the weighing of these factors.
On the present record, we find no evidence that the AGC, the Houston Chapter, or the Employer participated in the negotiation or execution of the interim agreement, the reconstituted (second) Joint Board agreement, or the New Impartial Joint Board agreement. Nor is there any evidence that any of these parties have agreed to, or expressed any intention of agreeing to, refer jurisdictional disputes to the New Impartial Board. See Bricklayers, Masons and Plaaterers International Union of America, Local No. 1, AFL-CIO (Lembke Constraction Company of Colorado, Inc.), 194 NLRB 649.
The Employer is also a member of the Masonry Contractors Association, which has an agreement with Bricklayers. However, that agreement makes no reference to the resolution of disputes by the Joint Board.
International Association of Machinists, Lodge No. 1743, AFL-CIO (J.A. Jones Construction Compaану), 135 NLRB 1402.
Furthermore, there is no evidence that the Employer, who is a member of the MCA, has entered into this 1962 agreement.
In addition to its other contracts, the Employer also has an agreement with Laborers International Union for its employees who are members of that union and do part of the disputed work as cement mason tenders.
Bricklayers & Stonemasona Union Local No. 3 of Arizona (Concrete Erection), 195 NLRB 232: also Hansen & Hempel, Inc., 22 NLRB No. 158.
RYOLEX
silicone treated perlite
masonry fill insulation
installs fast...
saves energy!
Ryolex... the big value in masonry insulation throughout the midwest!
* Reduces heat transmission up to 50%!
* Easy to pour no cutting or fitting. Inexpensive.
* Permanent and inert expanded volcanic glass rock!
* Fire safe! Rot and rodent proof.
* Lightweight, odorless, clean, sound deadening.
SILBRICO
CORPORATION
6300 RIVER ROAD HODGKINS, ILLINOIS 60525
CHICAGO PHONE (312) 735-3322
masonry January, 1974
47