Construction Union Representational Case Highlights Craft Unit Analysis with Daniel / Steiny Voter Eligibility Formula

Construction Union Representational Case Highlights Craft Unit Analysis with Daniel / Steiny Voter Eligibility Formula.

Sheet Metal Workers Local Union 26 petitioned to represent approximately 15 “sheet metal workers” — defined functionally as Assistant Roofers and Journeymen who primarily perform sheet metal work — at Kodiak’s Sparks, Nevada commercial and residential roofing operation. Kodiak does not have a “sheet metal” classification on its books; everyone in the field is titled Journeyman Roofer, Assistant Roofer, Service Technician I, or Service Technician II. Kodiak argued the only appropriate unit was a wall-to-wall unit of all 72 roofers and service techs at the Sparks facility. The Region rejected Kodiak’s position on every contested issue.

The petitioned-for unit (sheet-metal-focused roofers) was appropriate even though Kodiak did not use a separate sheet-metal job title. The record showed a clean functional bifurcation: on three certified prevailing-wage payroll runs, employees coded almost exclusively under either the Sheet Metal code or the Roofer code. The sheet metal workers form their own crews under their own foremen, use sheet-metal-specific tools (tin snips, nibblers, sheet metal cutters, rivet guns), and on prevailing-wage projects are paid more than double the Roofer rate.

This is a craft unit under Burns & Roe. Once a craft is established, the inquiry ends — no separate “overwhelming community of interest” analysis is required (Nissan North America). The Regional Director found the workers are skilled craftsmen “primarily engaged in the performance of tasks which are not performed by other employees and which require the use of substantial craft skills and specialized tools and equipment.” Following Schaus Roofing, the determinative factor was that skilled sheet metal work was assigned along craft lines and there was no evidence non-sheet-metal workers ever performed skilled sheet metal tasks.

Even under the standard community-of-interest analysis, the employer lost. The Regional Director found distinct skills/training, no meaningful interchange, separate crews, separate supervision, and a more-than-twice the wage differential on prevailing-wage work. Kodiak failed to carry its “heavy burden” of showing no rational basis for exclusion.

Even though Kodiak disputes being a “construction industry” employer, it performs substantial construction work, triggering the construction-industry Daniel / Steiny voter-eligibility formula. (The Cajun Co.)

Mail ballot election ordered. Employees are scattered across northern Nevada (worksites up to 200 miles from the Sparks facility) and never gather at a common location at common times — classic San Diego Gas & Electric “scattered” facts.

Kodiak Roofing & Waterproofing, LLC, Case 32-RC-383994
Decision and Direction of Election by Regional Director Christy J. Kwon, NLRB Region 32 (Oakland), May 18, 2026