Egg Harbor Township authorized the construction of a community center, which was controlled by the Township's Project Labor Agreement (PLA). All contractors working on this community center project were required to become signatories to the PLA. Sambe was assigned as general contractor and, thus, was a signatory to the PLA. Sambe then subcontracted the project's roofing work to Donnelly. Later, a dispute arose when Donnelly selected several carpenters who were not signatories to the PLA to work on the roofing. Another signatory to the PLA, "Sheet Metal," opposed the hiring of the carpenters and informed Donnelly that the carpenters could not complete the project. The carpenters then threatened to picket if Donnelly reassigned the roofing work to Sheet Metal. Sheet Metal attempted to resolve the dispute by pushing for an arbitration hearing. However, the carpenters continued to assert that they would picket the project if the work was reassigned. Donnelly then filed an unfair labor practice charge, alleging that the carpenters violated the NLRA by threatening to picket. The NLRB ended up awarding the disputed roofing work to the carpenters. What do you think the Board's reasoning was that led to this conclusion? Sheet Metal Workers Int'l Ass'n Local Union No. 27 v. E.P. Donnelly, Inc., 737 F.3d 879 (3rd Cir. 2013).