Section 21 Markwell & Hartz, Inc. (1967)?Related-Work Doctrine Does Not Apply to Construction Sites

• Library: Employer-Employee Law 2008

Local No. 761, International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers, ALF-CIO v. NLRB, 366 U.S. 667 (1961), on its facts, was limited to picketing at the primary’s premises. The question remained whether the related-work doctrine would be applied at a neutral site and specifically whether it would be applied to the construction industry. The NLRB has held that the related-work doctrine does not apply in the construction industry—i.e., the fact that all subcontractors on a site are engaged in a common effort to construct a building does not give the union license to picket the entire project when it has a dispute with only one or several subcontractors. Markwell & Hartz, Inc. v. NLRB, 387 F.2d 79 (5^th Cir. 1967). In NLRB v. Denver Bldg. & Const. Trades Council, 341 U.S. 675 (1951), the Supreme Court upheld the NLRB’s determination that a union engaged in an illegal secondary boycott by picketing an entire construction site for the purpose of forcing the general contractor to remove a nonunion subcontractor. The Court rejected the union’s argument that it had a primary dispute with the general contractor over its failure to utilize a union subcontractor. Significantly, the Court stated that the general contractor and the various subcontractors were to be regarded as separate employers.

In Markwell & Hartz, 387 F.2d 79, the union sought to organize a general contractor’s employees; when picketing of the construction site began, the general contractor...