McLeod v. TRUCK DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS & HELPERS LOCAL NO. 282

• Decision Date: 16 November 1962
• Citation: 210 F. Supp. 769
• Parties: Ivan C. McLEOD, Regional Director of the Second Region of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. TRUCK DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS AND HELPERS LOCAL NO. 282, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, Respondent.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York

210 F. Supp. 769

Ivan C. McLEOD, Regional Director of the Second Region of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. TRUCK DRIVERS, CHAUFFEURS AND HELPERS LOCAL NO. 282, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, Respondent.

United States District Court S. D. New York.

November 16, 1962.

Jacques Schurre, New York City, for National Labor Relations Board.

Cohen & Weiss, New York City, for respondent; Bruce H. Simon, New York City, of counsel.

Zelby & Burstein, New York City, for Charging Party, United States Trucking Corp.

DAWSON, District Judge.

This proceeding came before the Court on a petition filed by the Regional Director of the Second Region of the National Labor Relations Board for a temporary injunction, pending the final disposition of the matters involved before the Board, alleging that respondent has engaged in, and is engaging in, unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(b) (4) (D) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b) (4) (D). This section proscribes strikes, threats of or inducements to strike in support of a jurisdictional dispute. It is designed to protect commerce from disruption as a result of jurisdictional claims of labor organizations to particular work.

The section makes it an unfair labor practice for a labor organization or its agents

"to engage in, or to induce or encourage any individual employed by any person engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce to engage in, a strike or a refusal in the course of his employment to use * * * or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities or to perform any services * * * where * * * an object thereof is —

* * * * *

"(D) forcing or requiring any employer to assign particular work to employees in a particular labor organization * * * rather than to employees in another labor organization * * * unless such employer is failing to conform to an order or certification of the Board determining the bargaining representative for employees performing such work".

A hearing was held. The Court finds the following facts:

The respondent is a labor organization.

The City of New York is erecting a garage in Maspeth, Long Island, for the Department of Sanitation at an estimated cost of over $6,000,000. The general contractor is Joseph F. Blitz, Inc. Blitz subcontracted the concrete work to Concrete Construction Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary. Concrete Construction contracted with Colonial Sand & Stone Co., Inc. to supply the sand, stone and bulk cement. Colonial in turn contracted with Universal Atlas Cement Division of United States Steel Corporation to supply the bulk cement. Universal has a distributing point in Glen Cove, Long Island. In order that it might supply the bulk cement Universal contracted with United States Trucking Corporation, the charging party, to pick up the cement from Universal's distributing point in Glen Cove and deliver it to the job site.

United States Trucking Corporation has a collective bargaining agreement with its own employees, who are represented by Truck Drivers Local Union No. 807, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America (hereinafter called Local No. 807).

Colonial Sand & Stone Co., Inc. has a collective bargaining agreement whereby its employees are represented by the respondent union (hereinafter called Local No. 282).

On the morning of October 9, 1962, United States Trucking Corporation, pursuant to the arrangements hereinabove referred to, picked up a truck load of cement at Universal's plant in Glen Cove and drove it to the job site at Maspeth, Long Island. At about the same time Colonial Sand & Stone Co., Inc. was delivering truck loads of sand to the same job site. On that day the business agent of the respondent at the job cite in Maspeth, Long Island, stated to the representative of the general contractor that the work of driving trucks loaded with cement belonged to respondent union, Local No. 282, and that if the cement was delivered by trucks driven by members of Local No. 807 they would direct the members of Local No. 282, who were delivering the sand, not to dump the sand, and, in effect, threatened that if any cement were brought to the job driven by members of Local No. 807 the job could not go ahead, because no sand would be delivered or dumped by the members of Local No. 282 (the respondent herein). As a result of this threat United States Trucking Corporation was directed not to unload the cement but to take it away, and after that time the trucking corporation was unable to make any further deliveries of cement to the job site until respondent was temporarily restrained by an order of this court. There is no dispute that respondent has not been certified by the National Labor Relations Board as a collective bargaining representative of any employees of United States Trucking Corporation.

We have, therefore, a typical jurisdictional dispute between two locals of the same International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America. Apparently the locals are part of the Joint Teamsters Council for Metropolitan New York. They have submitted their jurisdictional dispute for determination by the ...