Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 28, 1945

61 N.L.R.B. 1508 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. and INTERNATIONAL
FISHERMEN AND ALLIED WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL 46, CIO
In the Matter Of SUPERIOR PACKING Co .; LIBBY, MCNEILL & LIBBY ;
PYRAMID FISHERIES Co. INC. ; BELLINGHAM CANNING CO.; ICY
STRAITS SALMON CO.; ASTORIA & PUGET SOUND CANNING CO. (CON-
SOLIDATED WITH PACIFIC AMERICAN FISHERIES , INC.) ; DOUGLAS
FISHERIES, INC.; FARWEST ALASKA Co. (CONSOLIDATED WITH A. R. B.
PACKING CO. AND BURNETT INLET SALMON Co.) ; FIDALCO ISLAND
PACKING Co .; HAINES PACKING COMPANY ; P. E. HARRIS & CO.;
AUGUST BUSCI-IMANN, H. A. FLEAGER, AND A. P. WOLF, PARTNERSIIIP,
D/B/A HOOD BAY SALMON Co.; HYDABURG COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION ;
THE NAKAT PACKING CORPORATION ; NEW ENGLAND FISH Co.; PACIFIC
AMERICAN FISHERIES , INC.; PERATROVICH & SON PACKING COMPANY;
PERIL STRAIT PACKING COMPANY , ALSO KNOWN AS TODD PACKING COM-
PANY; SEBASTIAN - STUAR' FISH Co. and GRAND CAMP OF ALASKA
NATIVE BROTHERHOOD
In the Matter of ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY , INC., ITS MEMBER FIRMS
AND INDEPENDENT OPERATORS and FOOD, TOBACCO, AGRICULTURAL AND
ALLIED WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO
Cases Nos. 19-R-1268,19-R-13-51 to 19-R-1355, inclusive; 19-R-1420
to 19-R-1436, inclusive; and 195 R-1398, respectively.Decided May
28, 1945
DECISION
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
AND
ORDER
Pursuant to a Board Order dated February 7, 1945, Trial Examiner
Robert F. Koretz issued on April 6, 1945, his Recommended Decision
and Recommended Direction of Elections- (hereinafter designated as
the Recommended Decision ) in the above -entitled proceedings . There-
after, briefs were filed by certain of the interested parties .' None of
the parties requested oral argument before the Board. As indicated
' A brief was filed by Alaska Salmon Industry , Inc, and briefs were filed by representa-
tives of Seafarers International Union of North America, A F. L , and certain of its
affiliates
61 N. L . R. B., No. 240.
1508
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1509
in that portion of the Recommended Decision entitled "Statement of
the Case," the Trial Examiner referred certain motions to the Board.
These motions are hereby denied to the extent that they are incon-
sistent with our Decision herein. The Board has considered the rul-
ings of the Trial Examiner at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial
error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
The Board has considered the Trial Examiner's Recommended De-
cision, the briefs submitted by the parties, and the entire record in the
case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommenda-
tions of the Trial Examiner and his Recommended Decision in its
entirety, with the following additions and modifications.2
The appropriate units of non-resident cannery workers; the alleged
questions concerning representation therein
The Trial Examiner recommended as appropriate for the purposes
of collective bargaining a single unit composed of all non-resident
cannery workers employed by the Members and separate units for em-
ployees of each Independent employing non-residents as cannery
workers. We agree with the Trial Examiner's recommendation re-
garding the appropriate units of the Independents' non-resident em-
ployees; 3 however, to the extent set forth below, we do not concur in
his unit recommendation with respect to the non-resident employees
of the Members.
Although the corporate charter and bylaws of ASI establish its
authority to determine policies and to act for its Members in labor
relations matters, the history of collective bargaining for non-resident
cannery workers does not indicate universal acceptance of that au-
thority. The record before us shows that the existing agreement
between the ASI and the FTA-CIO has been accepted by 44 Members,
While 12 Members 4 have been permitted to maintain contractual rela-
tions with the SIU-AFL, pursuant to which they have requisitioned
non-resident cannery workers through its hiring hall. It is further
shown that the latter Members have followed this practice since the
formation of the ASI, and that those who were engaged in salmon
canning operations prior to 1940 had followed a similar practice in 1938
and 1939, when the CSI, the predecessor of the ASI, conducted negotia-
2 For the purposes of the present discussion , we shall employ the designations used by
the Trial Examiner in referring to the interested parties See Appendix D of the Recom-
mended Decision.
3 Matter of Advance Tanning Company, et al., 60 N L . R B 923; see also Matter of
Monon Stone Company, 10 N L R B. 64
4 These 12 Members are : Alaska Red Salmon Packers , Inc. ; Annette Island Canning
Co ; Bellingham Canning Co , Burnett Inlet Salmon Co ; Douglas Fisheries , Inc.; Farwest
Alaska Company ; Grimes Packing Co ; W. Oxenburg , and S Oxenburg, d/b/a Independent
Salmon Canneries ; Dean C Kayler , Ketchikan Packing Co ; Frank McConaghy Co. ; and
Washington Fish and Oyster Co., Inc.
1510 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tions. Although the ASI has considered the contracts which it nego-
tiates for non-residents binding upon Members which sign the agree-
ments or requisition employees from the FTA-CIO in any particular
year, and upon those which in the past had customarily brought them-
selves within the coverage of the contracts in this manner, it has not
regarded these contracts binding upon Members which have custom-
arily requisitioned employees from, the SIU-AFL. In sum, these
minority Members have been allowed to act independently in hiring
non-residents for cannery work.
Upon this state of the record, we cannot find that the entire member-
ship of the ASI constitutes a single unit appropriate for collective bar-
gaining with respect to non-resident cannery workers. The independ-
ent action of the minority Members has established them as units apart
from the remainder of the Members. The fact that they have executed
agreements with the SIU-AFL which are identical with the contracts
negotiated by the ASI and the FTA-CIO cannot be considered de-
terminative, since they, like the Independents, have not been obligated
to accept the contracts negotiated by the ASI. Despite the fact that
there are considerations which indicate the appropriateness of an
association-wide unit, the independent action of the 12 Members in
securing and employing cannery workers marks them as "exceptions"
to the broad unit which is comprised of the majority of ASI Members.'
We are of the opinion that, with respect to non-resident cannery
workers, the parties have never succeeded in forming a unit coextensive
with the entire membership of the ASI.
We find that the non-resident cannery workers employed by Mem-
bers who have customarily requisitioned through the FTA-CIO hiring
hall, and who have customarily accepted the agreements negotiated
by that organization with the ASI, constitute a single unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act.' We further find that the non-resident cannery
workers employed by each of the 12 Members who have customarily
requisitioned through the SIU-AFL hiring hall, and who have custo-
marily accepted the contracts proffered by that organization, constitute
separate units appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining,
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.7
In the light of these findings, it is necessary to consider the ques-
tions of representation which are alleged to have arisen with respect
to non-resident cannery workers. Since the multiple-employer unit
which we find to be appropriate is coextensive with the coverage of
the present exclusive bargaining contract between the ASI and the
See Matter of Shipowners Association of the Pacific Coast , 32 N L R 1i 668
e This unit comprises the non-resident employees of all Members excepting the 12 Mem-
bers named in footnote 4, supra.
7 These 12 Members are named in footnote 4, supra,
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1511
FTA-CIO, and since there is no showing that the ASI refuses to
accord exclusive recognition to the FTA-CIO within this unit, we
find that no question concerning the representation of the non-resi-
dent employees within this unit has arisen within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (c) of the Act. Since the FTA-CIO has submitted no evidence
of representation among employees within the units found appro-
priate for non-resident employees of the 12 Members who have cus-
tomarily requisitioned such workers from the SIU-AFL," we find
that no questions concerning the representation of these employees
have arisen within the meaning of Section 9 (c) of the Act. Since
there is no showing that any of the Independents which have requisi-
tioned non-resident employees from the FTA-CIO refuse to grant
exclusive recognition to this organization with respect to such em-
ployees, and since the FTA-CIO has submitted no evidence of
representation among the non-resident employees of any other Inde-
pendent, we find that no questions concerning representation of the
non-resident employees of the Independents have arisen within the
meaning of Section 9 (c) of the Act.
We shall therefore dismiss the petition of the FTA-CIO insofar
at it relates to non-resident cannery workers.
The determination of representatives
Eligibility to vote
The Trial Examiner has recommended that eligibility to vote in any
elections be limited to employees within the appropriate units who
have worked a total of 15 days or more in the 1944 and 1945 canning
seasons, or in either season. It appears, however, that a strict applica-
tion of this formula would present administrative difficulties. If
the elections which we shall order are conducted early in the 1945
canning season, there is some likelihood that persons unable to qualify
on the basis of 1944 employment would still be awaiting employment
at the time when the elections are being conducted.. The Trial Ex-
aminer has recommended that the ballots of these persons be im-
pounded and counted only if their subsequent employment in the
balance of the 1945 season serves to satisfy the terms of the eligibility
formula set forth above. We are of the opinion that this procedure
will be productive of difficulties in application. In order to avoid
the necessity for this procedure we shall readjust the formula to pro-
vide that eligibility to vote be limited to the employees within the
appropriate units who have worked a total of t15 or more days in
the 1944 canning season, or a total of 15 or more days in the 1944'
s See footnote 4, supra.
1512 DECISIONS OI' NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and 1945 canning seasons combined, or a total of 5 or more days in the
1945 canning season, prior to the date of the election.
The Companies involved
We accept the Trial Examiner's recommendation that our Direc-
tion provide for elections among those Companies which employ
workers within the units found appropriate, and their successors
or assigns, if any. Since the Recommended Decision was issued, we
note that the "Concentration Program" for the approaching season
has been announced.9 It indicates that four Companies plan to
operate during the canning season as successors or assigns of Com-
panies named in Appendix A of the Recommended Decislon.10 Ac-
cordingly, our Direction of Elections shall be construed to provide
specifically for elections among the resident workers at the canneries
of each of these four Companies, as well as any other successors or
assigns which may undertake canning operations within the scope
of the units which we find to be appropriate.ii
Conclusion
We shall direct that the questions concerning representation which
have arisen be resolved by elections by secret ballot among the -em-
ployees within the appropriate units of resident cannery employees
who have worked a total of 15 or more days in the 1944 canning season,
or who prior to the date of the election at the cannery at which they are,
or were last, employed, have worked a total of 15 or more days in the
1944 and 1945 canning seasons combined or a total of 5 or more days
in the 1945 canning season for one or more of the Companies listed in
Appendix A of the Recommended Decision, or their successors and
assigns, within the scope of one or more of the appropriate units (pro-
vided that if any of the said employees has been employed by more
than one of such Companies, he shall vote as the employee of the
Company by which he was last employed), subject to the limitations
and additions set forth in the Direction.
9 Order No 2046, Order Affecting the Salmon Canning Industry in the Territory of
Alaska, United States Dept of the Interior, 10 Fed Register 4506.
10 These Companies are : Bristol Bay Packing Company , Farwest-Saginaw Company ;
Alaska Food Products Corporation ; and west Coast Packing Company.
11 When the Recommended Decision was issued , there was no evidence of canning opera-
tions by Independents in the Bristol Bay District , and none were listed in Appendix A
of the Recommended Decision . The Concentration Program for 1945 indicates that
the Bristol Bay Packing Company now operates the two canneries formerly operated
in the Bristol Bay District by the Alaska Salmon Company. Since we have no present
information as to whether the Bristol Bay Packing Company is a Member or an Inde-
pendent, we shall direct that the name of this Company be added to Appendix A as an
Independent, if investigation proves it to be one, and that it be substituted therein for
the Alaska Salmon Company , if investigation proves it to be a Member. In order to
provide for elections in either contingency , we shall direct elections among resident
cannery workers in the Bristol Bay District as recommended.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1513
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DI1uECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Companies in
the Southeastern, Bristol Bay, and Peninsula Districts, listed in Ap-
pendix A of the Recommended Decision and Recommended Direction
of Elections, or their successors and assigns, separate elections by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than one
hundred and fifty (150) days from the date of this Direction, under the
direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Nineteenth
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said
Rules and Regulations, among the employees within each of the units
found appropriate in Section IV, C, subdivisions (c), (d), (e), (f),
(g), and (h) of the Recommended Decision and Recommended Direc-
tion of Elections, who have worked a total of 15 or more days in the
1944 canning season, or who, prior to the date of the election at the
cannery at which they are, or were last, employed, have worked a total
of 15 or more days in the 1944 and 1945 canning seasons combined or a
total of 5 or more days in the 1945 canning season, for one or more of
the Companies listed in Appendix A of the Recommended Decision and
Recommended Direction of Elections, or their successors and assigns,
within the scope of one or more of the appropriate units (provided
that if any of the said employees has been employed by more than, one
of such Companies, he shall vote as the employee of the Company
by which he was last employed), including employees who did not
work during the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vaca-
ti on or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed
forces of the United States who present themselves in person gat the
polls, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been dis-
charged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the
date of the elections, (1) to determine whether the employees described
in subdivisions (c) and (f) of Section IV, C desire to be represented
by the FTA-CIO or by the IFAWA, affiliated with the CIO, for the
purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither; (2) to determine
whether or not the employees described in subdivisions (d) and (g)
of Section IV, C desire to be represented by the FTA-CIO for the
purposes of collective bargaining; and (3) to determine whether the
employees described in subdivisions (e) and (h) of Section IV, C
desire to be represented by the FTA-CIO, by the ANB-ANS, or by
the Seafarers, AFL for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by
none of the said organizations.
1514 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for investigation and certifi-
cation of representatives filed herein by the Food, Tobacco, Agricul-
tural and Allied Workers Union of America, CIO, insofar as it relates
to non-resident cannery workers, and resident cannery workers in the
Kodiak-Afognak, Cook Inlet, and Copper River and Prince William
Sound Districts,, be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
TRIAL EXAMINER'S RECOMMENDEp DECISION
AND
RECOMMENDED DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Messrs. Maurice M Miller and Joseph D Holmes, for the Board.
Mr. Henry Van lloevenberg, of Seattle, Wash., for the ASI.
Jones & Bronson, by Mr. Albert Olsen, of Seattle, Wash., for Northern Com-
mercial Company.
Mr. Conrad Espa, of Seattle, Wash., for the FTA-CIO
Mr. J. F. Jurich, of Seattle, Wash, for the IFAWA-CIO.
Messrs W. C. Hinman and Ed Coester, of Seattle Wash.; Mr. Frank Marshall,
of Juneau, Alaska ; and Mr. Andrew R. Ranson, Sr, of Petersburg, Alaska, for the
SIU-AFL.
Messrs. Frederick Paul and William L Paul, Jr., of Juneau, Alaska, for
the ANB
STATEMENT Or THE CASE1
Upon separate petitions duly filed by International Fishermen and Allied
Workers of America, Local 46, CIO, herein called the IFAWA-CIO ; 2 by Grand
Camp of Alaska Native Brotherhood,' herein called the ANB ; by Food, Tobacco,
Agricultural and Allied Workers Union of America, CIO, herein called the FTA-
CIO,' alleging that questions affecting commerce had arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc, Seattle, Washington,
herein called the ASI, its members, herein called the Members, and certain inde-
pendent operators, herein called the Independents 5 all of whom are listed in
Appendix A, attached hereto,` the National Labor Relations Board, herein called
IIn view of the large number of abbreviations used herein, a Glossary of Abbreviations
is attached hereto as Appendix D
Y For convenience , International Fishermen and Allied Workers of America and its
Local 46 at times are both referred to as the IFAWA-CIO.
3 This is the correct name of this organization Its name is set forth in its petitions
as Grand Camp Alaska Native Brotherhood
4 The petition and other formal papers were amended at the hearing to set forth the
name of this union as it appears above. Its name appears in its petition as United Cannery,
Agricultural, Packing and Allied Workers of America. CIO, which name recently has been
changed to that appearing above
5 The Members and the Independents are at times collectively called the Companies
'The names of certain of the employers listed in Appendix A have been corrected in
accordance either with amendments made at the hearing or with other evidence disclosing
the correct designation . At the opening of the hearing, the FTA-CIO moved in effect
to amend its petition by deleting the names of Northern Commercial Compariv and Bering
Trading Company from the list of employers set forth , on the ground , in substance, that
these Companies are engaged in small , family operations at places far removed from other
canneries and that these operations are not considered an integral part of the industry.
There was no objection ; the motion was granted.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1515
the Board, provided for an appropriate consolidated hearing upon due notice
before Robert F. Koretz, the undersigned Trial Examiner. Said hearing was
held between December 20, 1944, and January 2, 1945, at Seattle, Washington,
and between January 10 and 24, 1945, at Juneau, Alaska.' The ASI, Northern'
Commercial Company, the IFAWA-CIO, the ANB, the PTA-CIO, Seafarers
International Union of North America and certain of its affiliates,' herein collec-
tively and individually at times called the SIU-AFL, appeared," participated, and
were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine wit-
nesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues During the hearing,
the SIU-AFL moved to dismiss the petititon of the FTA-CIO on the ground, in
substance, that the bargaining unit set forth therein is not appropriate, and the
petititon of the IFAWA-CIO on the ground, in substance, that the Board lacked
jurisdiction because the alleged question of representation involved a jurisdic-
tional dispute between the IFAWA-CIO and the FTA-CIO. - The undersigned
referred the motions to the Board. It is recommended that the motions be
denied to the extent that they are inconsistent with the findings of fact and
recommendations set forth below. At the conclusion of the hearing, counsel
or representatives of the IFAWA-CIO, the ANB, the FTA-CIO, the SIU-AFL,
and the ASI argued orally before the undersigned in the course of this argu-
ment, the representative of the FTA-CIO moved, in effect, to dismiss the peti-
tions filed by the ANB on the ground that the ANB is not a labor organization,
within the meaning of the Act. The undersigned referred the motion to the
Board. It is recommended that the motion be denied'
On February 7, 1945, the Board issued an Order that the undersigned issue a
Recommended Decision and Recommended Direction of Election or Elections, and
therein fix the time of all parties for filing briefs with the Board and for mak-
ing applications to the Board for oral argument.
Subsequent to the hearing, a representative of the SIU-AFL filed with the
Board a brief which the undersigned has considered.
Upon the entire-record in the case and from his observation of the witnesses,
the undersigned makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANIES
Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc, is a membership or non-profit corporation, or-
ganized in January 1940 in Delaware, with its principal place of business in
Seattle, Washington. As stated in its certificate of incorporation, it was organized
7 The deposition of Clyde L Spears, taken on December 12, 1944, pursuant to an order
of the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region, was received in evidence during the
hearing
6 At the commencement of the hearing , the undersigned granted a motion to intervene
by the SIU-AFL and the following labor organizations affiliated with it • Cannery Tender-
men's Union of Alaska and Puget Sound; Alaska Fish Cannery Workers' Union of the
Pacific ; Alaska Salmon Purse Seiners' Union and its local unions Nos. 1, 3, 4 , 5, 6, 7, and
10 and its auxiliary local unions of cannery workers Nos 1 , 3, 4, 5, 6 , 7, 10 and 11 ; and
the United Fishermen of Alaska.
9 The following Independents, also served with notice, did not appear Reilly & Wilman's
Cannery or Trading Bay Packers , Juneau Packing Co . Oscar Nicholson; Northern Pack-
ing Co. or Northern Fisheries , Peratrovich & Son Packing Co.; Sandvik Hand Cannery ;
Copper River Cooperative Co ; Crystal Falls Fish Co ; Darl Canning Co ; Dayville
Packing Co. ; Hagen & Co. ; Mitchell & Keck Packing Co . F. E Seator Packing Co. or
Nikishka Bay Packing Co. ; Polar Sea Foods Co. ; Port Chatham Packing Co. , Grindall
Fisheries , Inc. ; Hydaburg Cooperative Association ; Salt Sea Fisheries ; Parks Canning
Co ; Bering Trading Co , Alaska Native Consolidated Canning Co ; Alfred Jones d/b/a
Homer Spit Packing Co ; Pioneer S V Foods Co ; and Craig Packing Co
1516 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
for the purposes, among others, of (1) acting as intermediary between salmon
canners and workers, fishermen, labor organizations, and representatives of
prospective employees or fishermen, in order to promote harmony, fairness, and
justice in all their relationships ; (2) negotiating on behalf of its members agree-
ments between them and groups or associations of workers and fishermen; (3)
enforcing such agreements; and (4) representing its members in all matters
pertaining to the working conditions, hours, and compensation of workers and
fishermen.
The bylaws of the ASI provide in part :
ARTICLE XV
Section 1. This corporation shall have power to establish policies for its
members in all matters related to the objects of this corporation dealing with
workers or fisherman, and to represent and act upon behalf of its members
in any negotiations dealing with such objects, and any contracts, commit-
ments or undertakings made by this corporation on behalf of its members
dealing with any of the objects aforesaid shall bind the members' of the cor-
poration, except as hereinafter provided .. .
Section 3. No member shall be bound by any agreement of any kind ne-
gotiated by the corporation unless and until such member shall have executed
the same nor shall the corporation have the power to require any member
to operate to any extent whatever, but in the event a member shall operate,
then to the extent of such operations, such member shall enter into such
agreements as have been duly negotiated by the corporation with reference
to the operations of the character of such members' operations for the dis-
trict in which such operations shall occur.
Section 4. The corporation recognizes that particular local Alaskan con-
ditions may exist as to any particular cannery whereby a contract negotiated
by the corporation may be illegal or inappropriate as applied to such par-
ticular cannery or a particular member, in which event the contract shall
not be obligatory as to such cannery or member, subject to the supervision
of the corporation.
The undersigned finds that the ASI is an employer, within the meaning of
Section 2 (2) of the Act.
The Members and the Independents, together carrying on substantially all op-
erations in the Alaskan salmon canning industry, operate canneries at various
places in the Territory of Alaska, where they are engaged in processing and
canning salmon 10 Their operations, which are dependent upon salmon fishing
activity, are seasonal in nature. The fishing activity is regulated by the Fish
and Wild Life Service of the United States Department of the Interior.
In connection with their operations,•the Members and the Independents use
at their canneries materials, supplies and equipment, such as machinery, col-
lapsed cans, cotton web, cartons, gasoline, oil, salt, groceries, and miscellaneous
hardware, practically all of which are shipped to the canneries from the United
States. During the 1944 season, the total canned salmon pack in Alaska
amounted to 4,856,330 cases, practically all of which were shipped to points
outside Alaska. Approximately 95 percent of the salmon packed in the industry
is packed by the Members. During 1943 and 1944 between 60 and 70 percent
of the total pack was requisitioned by agencies of the United States Government.
10 The form of business organization of the Companies and the location of their canneries
are set forth, to the extent disclosed in the record, in Appendix A.
0
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1517
Beginning with the 1943 season, operations in the Alaskan salmon canning
industry have been governed by a "Concentration Program." This program is
embodied in an order of the Coordinator of Fisheries which was prepared as
the result of consultation among employers, government agencies, and inter-
ested labor organizations. It was designed to effect a saving in transportation
facilities, materials, and manpower by a consolidation of cannery operations,
and resulted in a reduction of the total number of canneries in operation. In
accordance with the terms of the Concentration Program, in several instances
two or more Companies combined their resources in the operation of a single
cannery under varying financial agreements respecting the proceeds of the
operation. In 1944, approximately 80 Companies were interested in the opera-
tion of about 96 canneries The remaining canneries are closed only for such
period as the Concentration Program for a particular year may provide. At
the time of the hearing, it was indicated that there would be no restriction
upon operations in 1945 except with respect to certain canneries in the Bristol
Bay District.
During 1944 approximately 15,000 persons were employed in the industry in
Alaska. About 7,000 of this number were employed as inside cannery workers."
Of the latter number, approximately half were residents of Alaska. The re-
mainder are non-resident workers recruited seasonally for employment in the
industry, principally from the States of Washington, Oregon, and California.
The undersigned finds the ASI, the Members, the Independents, and each of
them, are engaged in commerce within the Territory of Alaska, within the mean-
ing of Section 2 (6) of the Oct.'`
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Fishermen and Allied Workers of America is a labor organization
affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership
through various constituent local unions " employees of the Companies.
Food, Tobacco, Agricultural and Allied Workers Union of America is a labor
organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting
to membership through various constituent local unions" employees of the
Companies.
Seafarers International Union of North America is a labor organization affil-
iated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to membership through
constituent local unions of its various affiliates," employees of the Companies.
"Prior to the inception of the Concentration Program, in the years 1937 through
1942, the total number of employees in the industry varied from about 19,000 to 25,000
12 See Matter of Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc, et al, 33 N L R. B. 727.
19 The following local unions of the IFAWA-CIO admit to membership resident cannery
workers involved in this proceeding Locals No 46, 25 and 10 with headquarters, respec-
tively, at Dillingham, Anchorage, and Cordova, Alaska.
14 Amalgamated Local No. 7, with headquarters at Seattle, Washington, admits to
membership non-resident cannery workers here concerned The following local unions
of the FTA-CIO admit to membership the resident cannery workers Locals No 222 and
237 and Amalgamated Local No 269, with headquarters, respectively, at Petersburg,
Ketchikan, and Juneau, Alaska.
'6 Alaska Fish Cannery Workers Union of the Pacific admits to membership non-resident
cannery workers Resident cannery workers in Southeastern Alaska are admitted to
membership in the following local auxiliaries of the Alaska Salmon Purse Seiners' Union .
Locals Nos 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10 and 11 with headquarters, respectively, at Ketchikan,
Hydaburg, Craig. Klawock, Wrangell, Petersburg, Kake. and Douglas, Alaska Resident
canneiy workers at Kodiak Island are admitted to membership in the United Cannery
Workers of Kodiak Island an auxiliary of the United Fishermen of Alaska
639678-45-vol 61--97
1518 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Grand Camp of Alaska Native Brotherhood is a labor organization 18 admitting
to membership through subordinate camps 17 employees of the Companies
III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
A. The entire Territory
In its petition, and at the hearing, the FTA-CIO requested recognition as the
statutory representative of all cannery workers, resident and non-resident, em-
ployed in Alaskan salmon canning operations. At the hearing, the ASI rejected
this request,l8 taking the position, in effect, that its existing agreements with the
FTA-CIO define the units within which that organization is entitled to recogni-
tion for the duration of these agreements. As set forth more particularly here-
inafter, the FTA-CIO and the ASI are parties to two contracts executed in 1942,
one providing for recognition of the FTA-CIO as the exclusive representative of
non-resident cannery workers employed throughout Alaska, and the second pro-
viding for recognition of the FTA-CIO as the representative of its members
among resident cannery workers in Southeastern Alaska. Both contracts, by
their terms, are in effect "for the 1942 season and thereafter until the end of the
calendar year in which the President shall proclaim the cessation of hostilities
with the Axis power . . ." For the reason, among others, that these contracts
are of indefinite duration, they do not constitute a bar to a present determination
of representatives.19
B Resident employees in Southeastern Alaska
In its petitions, the ANB claims that it has been designated as the exclusive
representative of resident cannery workers at 22 designated canneries in South-
eastern Alaska. As set forth below, there are in effect three contracts between
the ASI and, respectively, the FTA-CIO, the SIU-AFL, and the ANB, each pro-
viding for recognition of the signatory labor organization as the representative
of its members among resident cannery workers in Southeastern Alaska The
three contracts further provide that "if and when it shall be established by
the . . . Board that the [respective organization] shall be the exclusive bar-
gaining agency for the workers employed under' this agreement, the Com-
pany shall imn;odiately recognize this agreement as the exclusive bargaining
contract . ."
Early in 1944, the ANB sent identical letters, in which it claimed designation
as the exclusive representative of resident cannery workers and requested collec-
tive bargaining, to 11 of the 22 canneries named in its petitions. The ASI re-
plied to these letters, stating in substance that it would not recognize the ANB
as statutory representative unless it was certified as such by the Board.20
16 The under signed rejects the FTA-CIO's contention that the ANB is not a labor organi-
zation within the meaning of the Act See Matter of Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc. et al,
33 N L R B. 727. The history, structure, and purposes of the ANB are discussed at
greater length below
" Saboidinate camps of the ANB and its auxiliary. the Alaska Native Sisterhood, are
located at the following points in Southeastern Alaska Yakutat, Haines , Klukwan,
Hoonah, Douglas, Juneau, Tenakee, Angoon, Sitka, Bake, Petersburg, Wrangell, Klawock,
Craig, Hydaburg, Ketchikan , Kasaan, and Saxman
18 No response to the FTA-CIO's request has been made by any of the Independents.
None of the Independents, excepting Northern Commercial Company, appeared at the
hearing See footnote 9, supra
19 Matter of Trailer Company/ of America, 51 N L R B. 1106
29 With the exception of Hydaburg Cooperative Association and Peratrovich & Son
Packing Co , all the operators of the canneries named in the ANB's petitions are Members
of the ASI So far as appears, the ANB did not request exclusive recognition of
Peratrovich & Son Packing Co No reply was received to its letter to Hydaburg Canning
Co , which prior to 1944 had operated the cannery of Hydaburg Cooperative Association.
Neither of the two Independents named above appeared at the hearing.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC.
C Resident employees in Bristol Bay
1519
On January 6 and February 23, 1944, the IFAWA-CIO requested the ASI to
recognize it as the statutory representative of resident cannery workers in the
Bristol Bay District 21 This request was denied on the ground that the FTA-CIO
also had requested exclusive recognition. On May 25, following issuance by the
National War Labor Board of a directive in which it refused to resolve the repre-
sentation dispute," the FTA-CIO and the IFAWA-CIO jointly executed a collec-
tive agreement with the ASI.
As set forth above, the SIU-AFL moved to dismiss the petition of the IFAWA-
CIO on the ground that the Board lacked jurisdiction because the alleged ques-
tion of representation involved a jurisdiction dispute between the IFAWA-ClO
and the FTA-CIO. In the past the Board has, as a matter of policy, refused
to permit rival unions affiliated with the same parent organization to resort to
the administrative processes of the Act for settlement of their representation dis-
putes where adequate and appropriate machinery was available to them under
the procedures of the parent organization 22 Here, however, the jurisdictional
dispute has been in existence for approximately 2l/_> years. During the first half
of 1944 and again at the time of the hearing, efforts were made by the IFAWA-
CIO and the FTA-CIO to reach an agreement. So far as appears, their efforts
have been unsuccessful. Concurrently with the earlier efforts at agreement,
the parties separately referred the matter to the Disputes Committee of the CIO,
as the first of several possible steps in seeking an adjustment by the parent or-
ganization No decision or recommendation has been issued by the Disputes
Committee. Since a present determination of the jurisdictional dispute appears
unlikely, the undersigned is of the opinion that effective resolution of the existing
conflict cannot be had without resort to the 'administrative processes of the
Act.2d
Statements of Board agents, introduced or read into evidence at the hear-
ing indicate that the FTA-CIO, the IFAWA-CIO, and the ANB each represents
it substantial number of employees in the respective units which each claims
to be appropriate.26 However, the undersigned finds hereinafter that all non-
resident cannery workers employed by the Members and those employed by
each of the Independents constitute appropriate units; that district-wide units
of resident cannery workers employed by the Members are appropriate ; and
that the resident cannery workers of each of the Independents 26 are appro-
priate units. Apart from the IFAWA-CIO's request for a certification of rep-
resentatives among all resident cannery workers in the Bristol Bay District,
the only requests for a certification of representatives in any of the units
hereinafter found to be appropriate were made by the FTA-CIO, which requested
such action in any appropriate unit, and the ANB, which requested such action
with respect to the resident employees of two of the Independents 24 The
statements of Board agents mentioned above indicate that the FTA-CIO rep-
21 The events which preceded this demand are set forth in Section IV, infra.
22 The directive provided .
It is understood that the question of the appropriate bargaining agency is not
to be passed on by the [National War Labor] Board, and that unless and until such
an agency is determined by the National Labor Relations Board no contract will be
ordered with respect to these issues
23 Matter of Weyerhaeuser Timber Co., 16 N. L R B. 902
24 See Matter of Chenaurgec Corporation , 60 N. I, R B. 412 , and cases cited therein
26 The evidence of representation submitted by the labor organizations involved herein
is set forth in Appendix B, attached hereto.
26 With the possible exception noted in footnote 94, infra.
17 Hydaburg Cooperative Association and Peratrovich & Son Packing Company.
1520 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
resents a substantial number of non-resident cannery workers ' and a sub-
stantial number of resident cannery workers 29 in the Peninsula and South-
eastern Districts 30 The FTA-CIO, however, submitted no evidence indicat-
ing that it represented resident cannery workers in the Kodiak-Afognak, Cook
Inlet, and Copper River and Prince William Sound Districts. The labor organi-
zations which are parties to contracts in these districts-the ,IU-AFL in the
Kodiak-Afognak District and the IFAWA-CIO in the Cook Inlet and Copper
River and Prince William Sound Districts-do not desire a certification of rep-
resentatives in these districts And there is no showing that any employers
within these districts refuse to continue to recognize the labor organizations
with which they have contracted The undersigned finds that no questions
concerning the representation of the resident employees of the Companies in
the Kodiak Afognak, Cook Inlet, and Copper River and Prince William Sound
Districts have arisen within, the meaning of Section 9 (c) of the Act. The
undersigned will recommend, therefore, that the petition of the FTA-CIO, inso-
far it it relates to such employees, be dismissed.
The undersigned finds that questions affecting commerce have arisen con-
cerning the representation of non-resident employees of all the Members and
the Independents, and of resident employees 31 of the Members and the Inde-
pendents in the Peninsula,- Bristol Bay, and Southeastern Districts, within
the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNITS
A. Scope of unit
1. Contentions
The FTA-CIO contends that the appropriate bargaining unit is composed
of all inside cannery workers, resident and non-resident, employed in Alaskan
salmon canning operations The IFAWA-CIO requests that the Board find ap-
propriate a unit of resident cannery workers employed in the Bristol Bay Dis-
trict. The ANB urges that separate units of resident cannery workers at each
of 22 canneries in Southeastern Alaska are appropriate.
:e With respect to the approximately 23 Independents involved in the proceedings, it
was shown that in recent years 7 have requisitioned non-resident cannery workers from
the FTA-CIO and 2 from the SIU-AFL The record indicates that the remainder have
utilized few, if any, non-resident cannery workers From the foregoing, and in view of the
fact that non-residents are recruited from a pool of migratory workers, as further described
herein, the undersigned is satisfied that the FTA-CIO's showing of representation is suffi
dent to warrant a determination of representatives among non-resident cannery workers,
if any, employed by each of the Independents
2u With respect to the approximately seven Independents in the Southeastern District,
five were closed during the 1944 season, and the ANB has made a substantial showing of
representation at the remaining two. So far as appears, in the Peninsula District there
is but one Independent, which did not operate its cannery in 1944. Under all the circum-
stances, including the FTA-CIO's substantial showing of representation among resident
cannery workers in the Peninsula and Southeastern Districts as a whole, the undersigned
is satisfied that the evidence warrants a determination of representatives among resident
cannery workers employed by each of the Independents in these districts.
30 In the Bristol Bay District, all the employers are Members.
31 Although employment in the Alaskan salmon canning industry is seasonal, it is shown
that the great majority of the cannery workers, both resident and non-resident, return to
work in the industry season after season and that a substantial portion of the workers
return to the same cannery each year. Upon the entire record, the undersigned finds that
the resident and non-resident cannery workers, as a group, are employees of the Companies,
within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act. Matter of Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc.,
et al., 33 N. L R. B. 727; Matter of Alaska Packers Association, et al., 7 N. L. R. B. 141.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 121
The IFAWA-CIO, the ANB,, the SIU-AFL, and the ASI oppose the establish-
ment of any unit in which resident and non-resident cannery workers are com-
bined. With respect to the non-resident cannery workers, the SIU-AFL contends
that separate unit of employees at each cannery are appropriate ; the ASI asserts
that a single territory-wide unit is appropriate ; the IFAWA-CIO and the ANB
take no position. Concerning the resident cannery workers, the IFAWA-CIO
contends that district-wide units are appropriate; the SIU-AFL urges that
separate units of employees at each cannery are appropriate. The ANB agrees
with the contention of the SIU-AFL insofar as Southeastern Alaska is con-
cerned; it takes no position regarding the remaining districts. The ASI urges
the propriety of a territory-wide unit of resident cannery workers, provided
that certain conditions are fulfilled with respect to the manner in which col-
lective bargaining is conducted; 32 in the absence of such conditions, the ASI
would favor the establishment of district-wide units.
2. The organization and operation of the Alaskan salmon canning industry
The salmon canning industry is highly seasonal in its operations. Salmon
are caught near the end of their migratory cycle as they come from the sea in
full maturity, seeking fresh water streams in which to spawn. The Fish and
Wild Life Service of the Department of the Interior has divided the coast line
of Alaska into districts, in each of which it fixes a definite fishing season of about
40 days. The opening dates for commercial salmon fishing in the various districts
vary from May 15 in the Copper River and Yakutat areas to July 25 in certain
parts of Southeastern Alaska. Closing dates in each district vary in similar
fashion from July 5 to September 30.
Upon their approach to fresh water, salmon are taken by various methods.
The largest portion-approximately 75 percent-is caught by fixed or floating
fish traps. This proportion varies from district to district, depending upon the
extent to which other types of gear, such as purse seines, beach seines, gill nets,
and other forms of apparatus are used. After the fish are taken, they ordinarily
are transported to the cannery by the use of small power boats knowns as tenders.
At the cannery, the salmon are sorted and stored in fish bins. Nearly all
canneries process fish on "lines" of high-speed machinery, on which the fish
are successively "butchered," cleaned, cut to size, packed in cans and cooked.
The cans are then labeled, packed in cases, and stored prior to shipment. Persons
who work in the salmon canning industry fall generally into the following groups :
(a) Those primarily engaged in catching and transporting fish (this group includes
the persons who construct, maintain, and operate fish traps ; those who maintain
and use the various types of smaller gear mentioned above ; and those who assist
in transporting fish to the cannery and in placing them in fish bins) ; and (b)
those primarily engaged in processing and handling fish within the cannery (this
group includes the machinists, who maintain and repair the cannery machinery,
and those persons collectively identified as inside cannery workers, who perform
various tasks on the cannery lines)."
The inside cannery workers, with whom this proceeding is mainly concerned,
are recruited from two sources. The group customarily referred to as resident
32 These conditions are discussed below.
33 This general description does not purport to delimit all spheres of activity within
the industry. Other persons are engaged as mess-house employees, carpenters or in other
work incidental to the activities mentioned above. And, subject to some variation among
the canneries , there is an occasional overlapping of function among the workers. So far
as they are material herein, these aspects of cannery activity are discussed more specifically
hereinafter
1522 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
cannery workers is recruited within the Territory, largely from persons residing in
communities adjacent to the cannery " The group customarily referred to as
non-resident cannery workers is recruited principally in the States of Washington,
Oregon, and California. Historically, the latter group has been composed largely
of migratory agricultural workers in the Western States, who make themselves
available for employment in the industry in the spring of each year at ports in
the three States named above," from which they are transported by the Com-
panies to the canneries in Alaska.
3 History of collective bargaining
a. Non-resident cannery workers
The first efforts to organize the non-resident cannery workers were made in
1932 by the American Federation of Labor. In 1933, the AFL chartered Cannery
Workers and Farm Laborers Union, Local 18257. Until 1936, however, the non-
residents were recruited mainly by labor contractors or agents, the employees
executing individual agreements both with the contractor or agent and the
cannery operator.
In 1936, Local 18257 reached an agreement with representatives of the industry
concerning hours of work and wages for non-resident employees, under the terms
of which various members of the industry agreed to accept for employment 330
union members.3° This agreement was arranged on behalf of the employers by a
Labor Committee of the industry, appointed as the result of an agreement by mem-
ber firms of The Association of Pacific Fisheries, a trade association In 1937,
this committee adopted the name of Canned Salmon Industry, herein called the
CSI.n In that year the CSI and Local 18257 negotiated an agreement under the
terms of which each signatory Company recognized the union as the representa-
tive of its members The agreement defined, for the first time, the various job
classifications denoted by the phrase "Cannery Labor" and established compre-
hensive provisions with respect to wages, hours, and working conditions It also
recognized the unqualified right of the signatory Companies to hire residents of
Alaska.
In the fall of 1937, by a vote of the membership, Local 18257 left the AFL and
affiliated with the United Cannery, Agricultural, Packing, and Allied Workers of
America,33 which had been organized as an affiliate of the CIO in July of that year.
The organization adopted the name of Cannery Workers and Farm Laborers
Union, Local No 7. Alaska Cannery Workers' Union, Local 20195, AFL, which
had negotiated contracts in 1936 and 1937 for nonresident cannery workers
shipping out of San Francisco, likewise shifted to the CIO at the close of the
1937 season, and thereafter became known as Local 5 of UCAPAWA. The Port-
land sub-local of Local 18257 became Local 226 of UCAPAWA.
During the winter of 1937-1938, a group of workers who had not approved the
shift in affiliation to the CIO received a new federal charter from the AFL, retain-
31 The term "resident" as used herein , includes both persons of aboriginal descent , usually
referred to as Natives, and all other residents of Alaska
35 In the years prior to the war, these ports included San Francisco, Portland, Seattle,
and Bellingham At present, due to war conditions, nearly all these workers are hired in,
and transported from, Seattle
36 Although representatives of the industry had agreed in preliminary negotiations to
accept 375 union members for employment, the agreement executed on April 24, 1936,
called for the employment of only 330 men
34 The CSI was not incorporated nor otherwise formally organized The designation
was merely a convenient title used to describe the operations of a group of associated
salmon packers in the fields of institutional advertising and labor relations.
38 See footnote 4, supra.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1523
ing for their organization the designation of Local 18257.38 A dispute between
the CIO and AFL affiliates concerning the right to represent the non-resident
cannery workers for the 1938 season led to the filing of 40 petitions with the Board
by Local No. 7 of UCAPAWA. A consent election was held by the Regional
Director for the Nineteenth Region early in May of that year among the employees
of all the Companies involved. The consent election agreement,'to which Locals
7 and 226 of UCAPAWA, Locals 18257 and 20454 of the AFL, and the CSI were
parties, provided, inter alia, that the appropriate unit for the purpose of collective
bargaining should include all non-resident cannery workers employed by the
Companies who were hired in the States of Washington and Oregon ; that the
employers, and each of them, would recognize and bargain with the union which
received a majority of all votes cast in the election ; and that the losing union
would not take any economic action against the employers because they bar-
gained or contracted with the winning union. The employees of all 40 Companies
participated in the election.40
The UCAPAWA• locals won the election and thereafter negotiated with the
CSI an agreement dated May 20, 1938, in which the unions were recognized as
the exclusive bargaining representative of all cannery employees hired from the
States of Washington and Oregon by those Companies who accepted the agree-
ment;. In the meantime, on May 11, 1938, the Board had certified Alaska
Cannery Workers Union, Local No. 5, CIO, as the exclusive representative of
the non-resident cannery employees of three Companies with headquarters at
San Francisco.41 Following the certification, Local 5 executed agreements cov-
ering non-resident employees hired at San Francisco. In 1939, Locals 5, 7 and
226 jointly negotiated an exclusive bargaining agreement with the CSI, acting
for those of its members who accepted the agreement The signatory Com-
panies agreed to recognize the Union as the exclusive bargaining agency of all
their employees "engaged for Alaska salmon cannery operations from the
States of California, Oregon, and Washington .. .
As set forth above, the ASI was formed in January 1940 and succeeded the
CSI in the conduct of negotiations for the 1940 season. The exclusive contracts
executed in that year, in 1941, and in 1942 by Locals 5, 7, and 226 and the ASI
also covered non-resident cannery workers hired in each of the three Pacific
Coast States. As appears above, the 1942 contract, as amended, is in effect
for the duration of the war.
Each of the agreements negotiated by the CSI between 1936 and 1939 was in
the form of a master agreement, copies of which were signed by the individual
Companies and the labor organization representing their partcular employees.
The first agreement between the FTA-CIO and ASI, covering the 1940 season,
was drawn in similar fashion, but it bore the signature of an ASI representative,
and merely provided appropriate space for the "acceptance" of the Company to
be bound by its terms. In subsequent years, the contract was amended to
show that it was executed by the ASI "representing those of its members who
39 This organization shared jurisdiction over Alaskan salmon cannery workers organized
in the AFL with another Federal Local, No 20454, composed principally of workers of
Japanese ancestry The latter group had been organized and chartered by the AFL early
in 1937.
40 Six of these companies did not operate in the 1938 season. Thirty-two additional
companies which were not involved in the election operated 39 canneries in Alaska during
the year. The record does not disclose whether any of these companies employed non-
resident cannery workers regularly or in 1938, excepting 3 companies with headquarters
in San Francisco which operated 10 canneries. Questions of representation with respect
to the non-resident cannery employees of these 3 companies were resolved in separate
Board proceedings noted infra.
41 Matter of Alaska Packers Association , et at., 7 N. L R. B 141.
1524 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
accept this contract by attaching their signatures hereto, or by requisitioning
men from the Union," and by the Union, acting on behalf of its Pacific Coast
locals. In each of these agreements, with the exception of that for 1940, the
contracting union expressly recognized the right of the contracting Companies
to employ resident Alaskans for cannery labor.
Since the inception of collective bargaining in 1936, neither the contracts
negotiated by the CSI, nor those executed by the ASI, have been adopted by
all employers of non-resident cannery'lahor in the industry. The contracts nego-
tiated by the CSI, which had no authority to bind the firms which sponsored
it, were in fact accepted by a "large majority" of the employers in the industry.
However, as appears above, some of the Companies in the industry did not
participate in the consent election of 1938 A few of these, as well as some of
the participating Companies, continued to hire non-resident workers through
the available facilities of the AFL Although the newly-chartered Local 182 ,57
dissolved following the election, another union affiliated with the AFL succeeded
it. This union, the Alaska Fish Cannery Workers Union of the Pacific, herein
at times called the AFCWU-AFL; 2 thereafter received requisitions and dis-
patched non-resident cannery workers to the Companies mentioned Following
the formation of the ASI, these Companies, although some of them became
Members, continued to requisition workers from the AFCWU-AFL. Although
the ASI has the authority to bind its members in the manner set forth in its
bylaws, the ASI has considered its contracts binding only upon Members which
sign the contracts or requisition employees from the FTA-CIO in any particular
year and upon those which in the past had customarily brought themselves
within the coverage of the contracts in this manner; however, it has not re-
garded such contracts as binding upon Members which have customarily requisi-
tioned employees from the AFCWU-AFC's
The relationship between these Companies and the AFCWU-AFL is based
upon separate contracts, the agreements now in effect having been executed
at various times between 1942 and 1944." Each of these Companies individu-
ally accepted a uniform contract by executing a memorandum agreement to be
bound thereby, and to check off union dues for the AFCWU-AFL. A compari-
son of this basic agreement with the 1942 contract between the ASI and the
FTA-CIO reveals that it is a verbatim copy of the latter contract in every
respect, excluding only the language of the preamble which identifies the con-
42 Chartered in 1939 as an affiliate of the Seafarers International Union of North
America, AFL.
93 The Members which have customarily requisitioned non-resident cannery workers
through the AFCWU-AFL hiring hall include the following : Annette Island Canning
Company, Metlakatla ; Ketchikan Packing Company , Ketchikan ; Independent Salmon
Canneries, Inc , Ketchikan ; Northern Packing Company, Ketchikan ; Farwest Alaska
Company, Wrangell ; Bellingham Canning Company, Klawock ; Douglas Fisheries, Inc,
Douglas, Burnett Inlet Salmon Company, Saginaw Bay , Dean C. Kayler and Alaska
Glacier Sea Foods Company, Scow Bay-all operating in Southeastern Alaska ; and Frank
McConaghy Company, Kodiak, Washington Fish and Oyster Company, Port William;
Grimes Packing Company, Ouzinkie: Alaska Red Salmon Packers, Carmel-all operating
on Kodiak Island.
In addition, the AFCWU-AFL has received requisitions from two Independents in
Southeastern Alaska : Peratrovich & Son Packing Company, Klawock ; and the Hydaburg
Canning Company of Hydaburg The latter company ceased operations at the end of the
1943 season, but the beneficial owners of the cannery, the Hydaburg Cooperative Associa-
tion, conducted salmon canning operations there in 1944, and requisitioned a crew of
nonresident cannery workers from the AFCWU-AFL for that year in the same fashion
as the predecessor operator.
9¢ The record does not disclose the manner in which these Companies originally estab-
lished their relationship with the AFCWU-AFL, nor does it indicate any contractual
dealings between the parties prior to the execution of the presently existing agreements.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1525
tracting parties. The AFCWU-AFL offered no evidence with regard to the
extent of the collective bargaining, if any, which had preceded the execution
of the above-mentioned memorandum agreements by these Companies.
The FTA-CIO , in two proceedings before the Board in 1939 , attempted to chal-
lenge the propriety of the developments outlined above, and sought Board
action to confirm its asserted status as the exclusive bargaining agent for all
non-resident cannery workers employed in the industry . No affirmative action
was taken by the Board."
Since the organization of the ASI, there has been no shift among its Members
with respect to the labor organization from which each requisitions non-resident
cannery workers . All Companies bound by the contracts executed by the ASI and
the FTA-CIO in the manner stated above have continued to accept these con-
tracts either by signing , or by requisitioning men from the FTA-CIO. None of
these Companies, according to van Hoevenberg 's uncontradicted testimony, has
ever protested its obligation to observe the current agreement with the FTA-CIO.
With respect to the Independents , it appears that most of them operate small
canneries at which non -residents are not employed as cannery workers. How-
ever, some of the Independents have requisitioned non-residents within the past
few years .46 With respect to two Independents which have requisitioned from the
PTA-CIO, and two which have secured their workers through the AFCWU-AFL,
contracts were executed which bound them to observe the terms of the non-
resident contract currently in effect in the industry . According to uncontra-
dicted testimony of Conrad Espe, Northwest Regional Director of the FTA-CIO.
the other Independents which requisitioned workers through this union 's hiring
hall did so on the basis of an understanding that such action bound them to
observe the terms of the aforesaid contract.
b. Resident cannery workers
The history of collective bargaining for resident cannery workers has varied
from district to district within Alaska , depending in part on the degree to
which residents have been employed in the various districts , and the extent of
their organization . For the purposes of the present proceeding , the history of
collective bargaining for resident workers may be most easily understood if dis-
cussed separately in each of six main divisions of the territorial coast line:
( 1) Bristol Bay District , which comprises Fishing District No. 1.
(2) Peninsula District , which comprises Fishing Districts Nos. 2, 3, and 4
45 In Case No. 19-R-321, filed June 16, 1939 , the FTA -CIO asserted that a question
of representation had arisen with respect to the non-resident cannery workers employed by
the various companies sponsoring the CSI . The record in the present proceeding indicates
that this petition was dismissed administratively by the Board on the ground that the
1939 agreement negotiated between the Union and the CSI recognized the petitioner
as the "exclusive and sole bargaining agent" for the non-resident workers, and that the
petition thus failed to present a question of representation
In Case No . 19-C-549, filed July 13, 1939 , the FTA-CIO asserted that the Burnett
Inlet Salmon Company ( a participant in the consent election mentioned above, and one
of the firms now requisitioning non-residents from the AFCWU-AFL) had failed to
reemploy certain of its 1938 employees for the 1939 season , in violation of Section 8 (1)
and (3 ) of the Act . The record herein indicates that the Regional Director refused to
issue a complaint on the basis of the facts revealed in the investigation
49 Such workers were requisitioned from the FTA -CIO by the Craig Packing Company
in 1942; Shepard Point Packing Company in the years 1937-40; Dayville Packing Company
in 1943-44 ; Pioneer Sea Foods in 1937-40-42-43-44 ; Parks Canning Company in the
years 1940-44 ; Chignik Packing Company ( now defunct ) in 1937-39-40-41-42 ; and the
Alaska Native Consolidated Canning Company.
For a list of the Independents which requisitioned non-resident workers from the
AFCWU -AFL, see footnote 43, supra
1526 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
( 3) Kodiak-Afognak District, which comprises Fishing District No. 5.
(4) Cook Inlet District, which comprises Fishing Districts Nos 6 and 7.
(5) Copper River and Prince William Sound District, which comprises
Fishing Districts 8, 9, and 10.
(6) Southeastern District, which comprises Fishing Districts 11 to 19,
inclusive"
As will be seen from the discussion to follow, the evidence establishes that col-
lective bargaining has followed separate and distinct patterns in each of the six
districts.
(1) Bristol Bay
Prior to 1942, the canneries operating in Bristol Bay were staffed mainly by
non-resident workers.41 In that year, operations in Bristol Bay were severely
restricted, because of its nearness to an active theater of military operations and
the diversion of essential transportation and shipping facilities to the needs of the
military authorities Cannery operations in 1942 were conducted almost en-
tirely by resident workers, assisted by a small number of "key" employees from
the Pacific Coast States., On May 22, the ASI negotiated a Memorandum of
Settlement jointly with representatives of the FTA-CIO, the IFAWA-CIO, and
the Alaska Fishermen's Union, the IFAWA affiliate most directly affected by the
terms of the agreement 40 The Memorandum provided for the exclusive recogni-
tion of the FTA-CIO, and set forth the terms and conditions under which resi-
dents would be eligible to perform work within the jurisdiction of each of the
signatory unions.60
In the Fall of 1942, the IFAWA-CIO sent to Bristol Bay a charter for a local
union of resident cannery workers to be known as Local 46 of the IFAWA-CIO
This charter was accepted at a meeting held in September 1942. Subsequently,
a charter submitted by the FTA-CIO was rejected by the resident workers.
During the 1943 season, the local AFU-CIO agent, acting on behalf of Local 46,
held at various canneries throughout the district a series of meetings at which
the resident cannery workers affirmed the action, taken at each of the earlier
meetings and authorized their respective employers to check off initiation fees
and dues for Local 46.
In April 1943, prior to the beginning of the fishing season in Bristol Bay, repre-
sentatives of the IFAWA-CIO and the FTA-CIO agreed at panel hearings before
the Twelfth Regional War Labor Board that the jurisdictional dispute would be
settled on the basis of a vote to be taken among the employees involved, and
that in the meantime the two organizations would jointly represent the resident
employees before the panel.
On October 21, 1943, and again on February 18, 1944, while proceedings before
the War Labor Board were still pending, the FTA-CIO requested the, ASI to
negotiate a collective agreement for the resident cannery workers in Bristol Bay,
47 Cf Matter of Alaska Salmon Industry , Inc, et al , 33 N L R B. 737 . For con-
venience in presentation , and for other reasons set forth hereinafter , the Southeastern
District is considered to include Yakutat, an isolated community in Fishing ' District 11,
some 100 miles north of the main portion of Southeastern Alaska.
48 It appears that the few resident cannery workers were accorded the benefit of those
provisions in the general contract for non -residents which could be applied to them.
49 Herein called the AFU-CIO.
0 Sometime after the end of the 1942 season , a controversy arose between the parties
as to whether this agreement had been confirmed by the Bristol Bay agent of the AFU-CIO
in accordance with its terms . The record clearly shows that the ASI and its members
in the district considered the contract to be in full force and effect, and that the AFU-CIO
agent collected permit fees for the FTA -CIO from resident cannery workers during the
season. The undersigned accordingly finds it unnecessary to determine whether or not the
contract was ever expressly confirmed.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1527
based upon various directives of the Regional War Labor Board and NWLB
previously issued. This request was denied The ASI took the position that
this request of the FTA-CIO indicated that its jurisdictional dispute with the
IFAWA-CIO remained unsettled, and that the ASI should not be compelled to
sign any agreement with either organization affecting resident workers in
Bristol Bay while this situation existed
The action of the IFAWA-CIO when it was confronted with this position of
the ASI, has already been set forth in Section III, sup? a The NWLB in its
final directive of May 13, 1944, specifically refused to resolve the judisdictional
dispute,'' but did not order the interested parties to reach an agreement on ether
issues in controversey. As a result of this directive, the ASI again executed a
collective agreement for resident cannery workers which was signed jointly
by the IFAWA-CIO and the FTA-CIO. The agreement provided that it was to be
applied retroactively to the 1943 season, and to the approaching season of 1944.
(2) Peninsula
The evidence with respect to collective bargaining for resident cannery workers
on the Alaska Peninsula is meager. So far as appears, the earliest organizational
activity among these employees occurred in 1941 In that year, a so-called
"Resident Section of the FTA-CIO's Local 7 accepted into membership resident
workers employed at the cannery of P. E. Harris and Company at False Pass.
It appears that this group participated in joint meetings with non-resident
workers during the 1941 season; that it acted jointly with the non-residents
in the presentation and discussion of grievances ; and that an agreement or
understanding, oral or written, with respect to the terms and conditions of resi-
dent employment was reached with this Company. A record of dues payments
by members of this group for the season of 1943 was submitted by the FTA-CIO
as part of its evidence of representation.52
Similar records of 1943-44 dues payments to Local 7 by resident workers in the
cannery of the Alaska Packers Association at Chignik were submitted by the
FTA-CIO It appears that the terms and conditions of their employment were
governed by the non-resident contract between the AST and the FTA-CIO, insofar
as it is applicable
(3) Kodiak-Afognak
Resident cannery workers in the Kodiak-Afognak District were organized about
1936 as aan auxiliary of the United Fishermen of Alaska, a local organization hold-
ing a direct charter from the AFL ' The first contracts governing their wages,
hours, and working conditions were uniform agreements negotiated individually
with several cannery operators in the district in 1937. By the terms of these
agreements, these Companies recognized the Cannery Workers Auxiliary of the
UFA-AFL as the exclusive representative of their resident cannery employees In
1938 the UFA-AFL secured a charter from the newly organized Seafarers Inter-
national Union of North America, AFL. Unitorm individual agreements provid-
ing for exclusive recognition were again executed with various Companies in
that year, in 1939, and in 1940. During each of these years negotiations were car-
ried on in Kodiak by a committee representing the union and a committee which
included representatives of all the signatory Companies Agreements reached as
n See footnote 22, infra
52 See Appendix B.
°S Herein at times referred to as the UFA-AFL The auxiliary organization, identified
as the United Cannery Workers of Kodiak Island, will be designated herein by the use of
the initials of its parent organization.
1528 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the result of these negotiations were reduced to writing in a uniform contract,
as described above, and representatives of each of the Companies then affixed.
their signatures to separate agreements.
The contracts for the 1941 season were executed in Seattle by a committee
representing the Cannery Workers Auxiliary of the UFA-AFL and the ASI, "rep-
resenting severally and individually those of its member firms who accept this
contract by attaching their signatures hereto." For the first time in the union's
history, its collective bargaining rights and obligations were separately set forth
in two agreements. The first agreement, covering canneries for which the union
furnished "all cannery labor," provided for recognition of the Union as the
exclusive bargaining agent for all employees engaged in "inside cannery labor"
for the signatory Companies on Kodiak Island. The second of these agreements
covered canneries for which the union furnished only part of the cannery labor.
It provided for recognition of the union as the bargaining agent for its members
employed as inside cannery workers by the signatory Companies.
Similar agreements for the 1942 season were executed in Seattle on April 25,
the ASI again representing "severally and individually" those of its Members
which accepted the contract by signing it "or by requisitioning men from the
Union." The agreements provided that they were to be automatically renewed
for the 1943 season unless appropriate written notice of a desire to modify or
change the respective contracts was given by either party. These agreements
were accepted by all the operating Companies in the Kodiak-Afognak District, and
continued in effect for the 1943 season, subject to certain modifications and ad-
ditions agreed upon by the union and the ASI before a Commissioner of Concilia-
tion. These agreements, as amended, remained in effect for the 1944 season.
(4) Cook Inlet
The only organization of resident cannery workers currently active in the
Cook Inlet District appears to be Local 25 of the IFAWA-CIO, with headquarters
at Anchorage In 1940, Local 25 and a local agent of the ASI negotiated an agree-
ment which governed the terms and conditions of employment for resident em-
ployees throughout the district. A substantially similar agreement was executed
in 1941 In the Spring of 1942, Local 25 and an ASI representative executed an
agreement in which the contracting union was recognized as the exclusive repre-
sentative of all resident cannery workers employed within the district. The
agreement further provided that it was to be automatically renewed for 1943
and from year to year thereafter, unless either party gave written notice of a
desire to modify or terminate it on or before January 15 of 1943 or any subsequent
year. At the time of the hearing, the agreement was open for revision, and the
parties had requested the U. S. Conciliation Service to assist in the adjustment
of their differences. The agreement had been accepted and observed in 1942 and
1943 by two Member Companies of the ASI which operate canneries in Anchorage
or its immediate vicinity. The extent to which Local 25 has been able to supply
workers to other Members operating in the district does not appear, although
the testimony of the manager of the ASI indicates that Members operating in
Lower Cook Inlet have adopted the wage scales set forth in the contract as the
basis of compensation of their resident employees.
(5) Copper River and Prince William Sound
In 1932 and 1933, Copper River and Prince William Sound Fishermen's Union
and a Cannery Workers Auxiliary were organized and functioned for a time
without "outside" afblliatigq. In 1935, the Cannery Workers Auxiliary received
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1529
a federal charter from the AFL; the Fishermen's Union received a charter from
the International Seamen's Union, AFL, in the Spring of the following year.
In 1939 the cannery workers' organization withdrew from the AFL and
remained independent until the Spring of 1940, when it was chartered by the
IFAWA-CIO as Copper River and Prince William Sound Cannery Workers Union,
Local No 10." Thereafter, negotiations were had between Local 10 and the
various Companies operating within its territorial jurisdiction. In 1942,5' a con-
tract was negotiated in Cordova by a committee, representing Local 10 and an
employers' committee containing representatives of all the interested companies.LB
The agreement reached in these joint negotiations was embodied in a uniform
agreement, copies of which were signed individually on May 20 by each of the
Companies involved in the negotiations." Although the agreement expired by
its terms on April 1, 1943, all parties orally agreed to observe the agreement for
the 1943 season, subject to such alteration as might be required by the final orders
of the WLB in the dispute case then pending. A similar understanding by all
parties was observed during the 1944 season. Local 10 has requested that the
ASI, acting on behalf of its Members in the district, negotiate a contract covering
1945 operations.G8
(6) Southeastern Alaska
The first attempt to organize resident cannery workers in this district was
made in 1936 by Local 18257 (AFL), which had established a branch in Ketchikan.
In July 1937, this organization negotiated a contract with certain cannery
operators in the Ketchikan area,57 who recognized it as the collective bargaining
representative of resident workers in their canneries who were members of the
Ketchikan branch of Local 18257. In February 1938, the Ketchikan branch
changed its affiliation, and received a charter from the FTA-CIO as Southern
Alaska Cannery Workers Union, Local 237. In the same year, the FTA-CIO
chartered locals at Petersburg, Juneau, and Hoonah, Alaska.BO
At the outset of its negotiations with the CSI in 1937, Local 18257 proposed an
agreement providing for recognition of Local 18257 as the representative of all
employees of the Companies in the industry "coming under the jurisdiction of
the Union", i. e., all cannery workers. Local 18257's proposal provided for a
union shop throughout the industry, applicable to the resident cannery workers
whom the Companies might employ, as well as to non-residents. Local 18257's
proposal was rejected; as noted above, separate agreements were executed for
non-residents and for residents in the Ketchikan area . From February to May
" Copper River and Prince William Sound Fishermen 's Union received a charter from
the IFAWA-CIO some 8 months after the cannery workers of the district became affiliated
with that organization.
^ The record does not contain evidence concerning bargaining between Local 10 and
the Companies in the Copper River and Prince William Sound District prior to 1942.
16 These included the following : New England Fish Co.; G. P Halferty & Co , W U
Gilbert Co., Inc. , Copper River Packing Company; Ellamar Packing Co, Inc . San Juan
Fishing & Packing Co ; and A W. Wittig and G. B Cedaiholm, d/b/a Port Ashton Pack-
ing Co., all Members of the ASI ; and Copper River Cooperative Company ; Dayville Packing
Company ; Pioneer Sea Foods; and L Utness and Company, all Independents
5' The signatory Companies included all the firms which operated salmon canneries in
the district in 1944, excepting the following two Independents . Hagen and Company,
and Scotty's Packing Company.
' It was indicated at the bearing that this procedure would be followed
"The contract was signed by the following Companies. Ketchikan Packing Company,
Independent Salmon Canneries, Inc. ; Beegle Packing Company; Baleom-Payne Fisheries,
Alaska Pacific Salmon Company , Berg Packing Company , New England Fish Company ,
Fidalgo Island Packing Company , and Northern Fisheries, Inc.
60 The Hoonah local was amalgamated with the Juneau local in 1944
1530 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
1938, the FTA-CIO made a similar attempt to negotiate with the CSI a contract
covering all resident and non-resident workers within the jurisdiction of its
constituent locals. The CSI refused to execute such an agreement. Concur-
rently with these negotiations the parties agreed upon and participated in the
consent election, previously noted, to determine the question of representation
which had arisen with respect to the non-resident cannery workers. The Alaskan
locals of the FTA-CIO thereafter requested CSI to bargain in Seattle concerning
the resident cannery employees of 26 companies in Southeastern Alaska. The
CSI refused to bargain in Seattle, preferring to have negotiations for resident
cannery workers conducted by its representatives in Alaska. On July 5, 1938,
the FTA-CIO filed with the Board 33 petitions for an investigation and certifica-
tion of representatives of the resident cannery workers of the CSI and 32 salmon
canning companies, which included all the firms in Southeastern Alaska as-o-
ciated with the CSI. In its petitions, the FTA-CIO requested a single bargaining
unit of all resident cannery workers in Southeastern Alaska The petitions were
subsequently withdrawn, for the alleged reason that the Regional Director had
advised the FTA-CIO that it would be impossible to conduct any elections in such
a large geographical area
Prior to the filing of the petitions, however, Local 237 of the FTA-CIO had
requested the CSI to bargain with it on behalf of the resident cannery employees
of 19 canneries in the $etchikan area On July 1, 1938, an agreement was reached
by Local 237 and the Alaskan representatives of the CSI, whereby Local 237 was
recognized as the collective bargaining representative of its members employed
as cannery workers by the signatory Companies associated with the CSI. This
agreement was embodied in uniform contracts which were executed individually
by Local 237 and the Companies operating within its jurisdiction Copics of the
same agreement were executed by Local 222 of the FTA-CIO at Petersburg and
some of the cannery operators in that area.
In negotiations with the CSI in 1939, and the ASI in 1940, the FTA-CIO again
requested recognition as the exclusive representative of both resident and non-
resident cannery workers in Southeastern Alaska The CSI and the ASI, in
both instances, refused to include the two groups of employees in one unit. As
a result, representatives of the FTA-CIO and its four Alaskan locals met with
the Alaskan representative of the employers' group to negotiate contracts for
the resident workers. In each year, a master agreement was executed in the
name of the FTA-CIO, copies of which were subsequently signed by the various
locals and the individual companies within their territorial jurisdiction. Be-
cause of this procedure, the terms of the contract signed by the various locals
of the FTA-CIO in these years were identical. The agreements provided, in
substance, that the signatory Companies would recognize the FTA-CIO and its
locals as the bargaining agency for the union members employed in canneries
operating under the jurisdiction of the respective locals; and that any certifica-
tion of the union by the Board as an exclusive bargaining agency would trans-
form the agreement into an exclusive bargaining contract.
On February 21, 1941, the FTA-CIO submitted to the ASI a proposed contract
providing for its recognition as the "exclusive and sole bargaining agent" for
resident and non-resident cannery employees of the Members throughout Alaska.
The proposed contract provided that the cannery operators hire both groups
of employees through union hiring halls, and provided for a union shop under
which non-members of the FTA-CIO would be required to secure permits as a
prerequisite of employment. The latter proposal was rejected by the ASI, and
separate contracts were again negotiated for non-resident workers and resident
workers in Southeastern Alaska.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1531
The resident agreement was executed on May 29,. 1941, by the ASI, "repre-
senting those of its members who accept this contract by attaching their signa-
tures hereto, or by requisitioning workers from the Union," and by the FTA-
CIO on behalf of its four Southeastern Alaska locals. In this agreement the
ASI and its members again agreed to recognize the FTA-CIO "as the bargaining
agency for its own members employed within the jurisdiction of the Union as here-
inafter defined, in salmon canneries operating in Southeastern Alaska." The
agreement defined the jurisdiction of the FTA-CIO in comprehensive terms,6' and
provided for possible recognition of the FTA-CIO as the exclusive representative
of the employees involved, under the same conditions set forth in the 1939 and
1940 agreements.
In 1942, the FTA-CIO did not renew its demand for recognition as the exclu-
sive bargaining representative of residents and non-residents in a combined
unit. Negotiations for agreements affecting both groups of cannery workers
were conducted at Seattle, and an agreement governing the terms and condi-
tions of employment for Southeastern Alaska resident cannery workers was
executed by the FTA-CIO and the ASI on June 12. Its provisions with respect
to recognition and the FTA-CIO's jurisdiction were identical with those in
the agreement for the prior year. In the same terms as the 1942 non-resident
contract, the agreement provided that it was to be effective for the duration of
the war
The collective bargaining practices of the SIU-AFL have been quite similar
to those of the FTA-CIO After the Ketchikan branch bf Local 18257 shifted
its affiliation to the FTA-CIO, those workers who desired to retain their affilia-
tion with the AFL organized the Cannery Workers Auxiliary Union of the Alaska
Salmon Purse Seiners Union 6 at Klawock, Alaska, on March 11, 193S. On June
1S of that year the Cannery Workers Auxiliary of the ASPSU-AFL negotiated an
agreement with the Alaskan representatives of the CSI whereby the auxiliary
was recognized as the exclusive representative of all resident cannery workers
employed by the companies associated with the CSI in Southeastern Alaska,
except in Ketchikan where the 0SI and the companies recognized the union
as the bargaining agent for its members The exclusive bargaining provisions
of the contract were never enforced, however, apparently because of the FTA-CIO
called a strike throughout Southeastern Alaska to obtain contracts recognizing
its Alaskan locals as bargaining representatives for their members employed as
resident cannery workers 6'
The contracts negotiated by the Cannery Workers Auxiliary of the ASPSU-
AFL with the CSI in 1939, and with the ASI in 1940, 1941, and 1942 each con-
tained provisions almost identical with those in the contracts negotiated by the
FTA-CIO during these years. In 1938, 1939, and 1940, the employer representa-
tives negotiated separately with the two labor organizations. In 1941 and 1942,
however, negotiations with both organizations proceeded simultaneously, but
not jointly, at Ketchikan in order to assure each organization that concessions
granted to one union would be granted to the other. Like the FTA-CIO's
contracts, the contracts of the ASPSU-AFL Auxiliary in 1938, 1939, and 1941)
were master contracts, applicable to all resident cannery workers in Southeastern
Alaska, which were formally executed by the Companies associated with the
61 This definition , which also appears in the non-resident contracts for 1941 and subse-
quent years, forms the basis for the contentions of the FTA-CIO regarding the composi-
tion of the appropriate bargaining unit, and will be considered, infra
69 This organization, herein at times identified as the ASPSU AFL, was an organization
of fishermen throughout Southeastern Alaska which had been formed a short time before
the events recited above, and which was then applying for a charter from the AFL The
ASPSU-AFL and its cannery workers auxiliary were eventually chartered by the SIU-AFL
63 See Matter of Alaska Salmon Industry Inc, et al., 33 N. L. R. B. 727.
1532 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
CSI and the ASI. The contracts executed in 1941 and 1942 were signed by the
ASI on behalf of its members in Southeastern Alaska. Like the FTA-CIO's
agreement , the 1942 agreement of the ASPSU -AFL Auxiliary is effective for the
duration of the war.
The Alaska Native Brotherhood, an organization formed at Sitka, Alaska, in
1913, was incorporated "for fraternal , social , and educational purposes" on
January 7, 1918.' From the date of its formation to 1938, the ANB concerned
itself primarily with the promotion of legislation and other activities designed
to improve the economic status of native Alaskans through education and other
means. With the advent of labor unions in the Territory, the Grand Camp of
the ANB, its governing body, urged Natives to join the organizations which
were then being formed. From 1936 to 1938, a considerable number of ANB
members maintained membership in the AFL and CIO affiliates in Southeastern
Alaska
In the fall of 1939, at its convention in Sitka, the ANB resolved that "the best
interests of the Native People of Alaska demand . . that the Alaska Native
Brotherhood take over the Collective Bargaining Agencies at [the names of several
communities follow] . . . and that the details of bargaining be handled through
the office of the Grand Secretary . . . it being specially provided that the final
contract shall be subject to ratification by the local group affected thereby." To
effectuate this resolution, the ANB proceeded to arrange for the establishment
of subordinate organizations at each of its local camps, identified as Collective
Bargaining Agencies.
Witnesses for the ANB testified at length as to the manner in which these
organizations functioned. In the early spring of each year, the officers of the
local camp issue a general call for a meeting, open to all persons in the community
who are available for employment in the nearby canneries. These meetings are
usually timed to coincide with a visit of the Grand Secretary. The Collective
Bargaining Agency is organized for the year, and a negotiating committee is
chosen by a majority vote The negotiating committee and the Grand Secretary
are advised of the desires of the group regarding the terms and conditions of their
employment in the approaching season. The Grand Secretary and the local
committee are then authorized to negotiate an agreement with the cannery
operators. At the meeting, and subsequent thereto, designation sheets are cir-
culated among the employees and prospective employees of the cannery.
In 1938 the ANB executed separate collective agreements with three companies
in Southeastern Alaska.' In 1939 the ANB executed separate exclusive bargain-
ing agreements on behalf of its members and those of its affiliate, the Alaska
Native Sisterhood, with two Companies." Three separate agreements were
executed in 1940, by the terms of which each of the signatory companies agreed to
recognize the ANB as the exclusive bargaining agent for the residents employed
"* The Articles of Incorporation provide that the membership of the organization is to
be composed of "the English speaking members of the Native residents of the Territory of
Alaska , and further terms of admission to membership may be prescribed by the constitu-
tion and bylaws of this corporation."
The purposes of the corporation are set forth in Section II of the Articles as follows
a. To assist and encourage the native in his advancement from his native state
to his place among the cultivated races of the world ;
b. To oppose , discourage, and overcome the narrow injustice of race prejudice ;
c. To aid in the development of the Territory of Alaska, in making it worthy of a
place among the States of North America
65 These companies were the Pyramid Packing Company, Sitka ; Haines Packing Com-
pany, Letnikof Cove; and Libby, McNeill and Libby, Yakutat These contracts were
destroyed by fire and as a consequence their terms are not revealed by the record.
es These contracts were executed by the Haines Packing Company, Letnikof Cove; and
the Pyramid Packing Company, Sitka.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1533
at its cannery "except as to those persons who are members of a recognized
union, mess department, office force, foremen, and subforemen." ' In 1941 the
ANB executed with the superintendent of the Pyramid Packing Company at
Sitka a memorandum extending the 1940 contract, with some change in wage
rates for the various classes of cannery labor. An agreement which was negoti-
ated in 1941 with a representative of the New England Fish Company at its
Chatham cannery was never executed by the company, but its terms were observed
by the parties during the 1941 season.
Early in 1942, the Grand Secretary of the ANB prepared a model form of con-
tract for presentation to the various companies at whose canneries the ANB
claimed that its members were employed. This agreement, which still required
the signatures of the individual employers, provided for recognition of the ANB
as the bargaining agency for its members only. The jurisdiction of the ANB,
as set forth therein, and most of the clauses dealing with wages, hours of work,
and other conditions of employment, were identical with their equivalent clauses
in the 1942 contracts of the FTA-CIO and the SIU-AFL for Southeastern Alaska
resident cannery workers. The agreements, however, were not signed by any
of the Companies operating in;Southeastern Alaska, primarily because of the Grand
Secretary's inability to secure the formal assent of the ASI.
No attempt was made by the ANB to secure formal written agreements for the
1943 season. It was assumed that the directives of the War Labor Board in the
dispute case then pending would fix the terms and conditions of employment for
all cannery workers in that year.
Early in 1944, the ANB requested of 11 Companies recognition as the exclusive
representative of their resident cannery employees. The ASI, as already noted,
refused to accord such recognition in the absence of a certification by the Board
of the ANB as statutory representative. The ANB then filed the first of its peti-
tions herein Concurrently its Grand Secretary entered into negotiations with
the Alaskan representative of the ASI. On August 22, 1944, the parties executed
a members-only contract substantially identical in its terms with the 1942 agree-
ments of the FTA-CIO and the SIU-AFL for resident cannery workers.'
4. Relationship between resident and non-resident cannery workers
The operations performed by cannery workers in the processing and canning
of salmon 8° are generally uniform throughout the industry, regardless of whether
67 These contracts were signed by the Icy Straits Salmon Company, Hoonah ; the Haines
Packing Company, Letnikof Cove, and the Superior Packing Company, Tenakee The
language quoted is subject to some slight variation in each of the three agreements A
similar agreement, negotiated with the Alaska Pacific Salmon Corporation for its cannery
at Port Altborp, was never executed by the company, but its terms were observed by the
parties for the season of 1940. A contract between the ANB and the Pyramid Packing
Company at Sitka, for the 1940 season , to which reference is made infra, was not
introduced in evidence.
68 These agreements differ in one respect which is material here The contract to which
the SIC-AFL is a party recognizes this union as having jurisdiction over "pre-season
work" done by cannery workers. Section 23 of the agreement establishes the rate of pay
for pre-season work performed after April 1. These provisions do not appear in the
existing agreement of the FTA-CIO. The contract of the ANB is identical in this respect
with that of the SIU-AFL. These contract provisions are considered infra, insofar as
they are relevant to an analysis of pre- season and post-season work and its relationship
to the regular duties of cannery workers.
69 A complete list of the work classifications covered by the contracts currently in effect
in the industry will be found in Appendix C. In general, the various occupations listed
therein under Class A are occupations which require varying degrees of skill based on
some experience in the industry Occupations listed under Class B generally require some
manual dexterity, but can be performed without difficulty tinder general supervision, after
a short period of instruction. '
639678-45-vol 61-98
1534 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the cannery is a shore plant or floating cannery or whether mechanized
equipment or a "hand line" is used z0 Both resident and non-resident can-
nery workers may be called upon to perform any operations for which
they are qualified by past experience and aptitude. While the record indicates
that the non-resident group supplied the largest portion of competent and experi-
enced workers in the earlier years of the industry, the number of resident workers
qualified to perform any operation has been growing steadily in recent years.
At the present time the employees in both groups are freely interchangeable;
they work side by side in many canneries; and any distinctions which exist in
their respective functions are based upon differences in the aptitudes and ex-
perience of the individuals involved, rather than upon differences in the place
and manner of their employment. Both groups of workers are under the same
supervision, although each group generally selects its spokesman or "delegate" to
handle grievances and other problems.
All non-resident cannery workers below the level of first and second foremen
are employed on a monthly basis. Resident workers, in the main, are employed
at rates of pay computed on an hourly basis, although some residents, residing
at a distance from the cannery at which they are employed, are paid a monthly
salary under arrangements substantially similar to those pertaining to non-resi-
dents In each case, the rates of pay established by contract provide differentials
based upon the type of work performed .71 ,
The monthly compensation established by contract for non-residents, and
residents maintaining homes at a distance from the cannery, is computed without
reference to additional factors affecting compensation, such as the cost of trans-
portation to the cannery and room and board during the season. In the case of
non-residents, transportation, meals en route and at the cannery, and living ac-
commodations, are supplied by the Companies at no expense to the employees.
Residents , however, are generally hired at the cannery; they bear the cost of
transportation, if any, between their homes and the cannery except in unusual
instances. Resident workers employed on a monthly basis in Southeastern
Alaska usually receive an additional allowance, in lieu of room and board, al-
though meals and living quarters are furnished by the Companies in some
instances . The hourly-paid residents in Southeastern Alaska usually live at
home and provide their own board in the centers of population at which canneries
are maintained. Where the cannery is located at some distance from the nearest
community, the employees often reside in quarters furnished without charge by
the Company, but provide their own board."
Because of the different basis used in computing the compensation of residents
and non-residents, it is difficult to make a direct comparison of their respective
wage rates. With the exception of their earnings in pre-season and post-season
work, which is discussed more fully below, resident workers receive compensa-
tion over a shorter period than non-residents. The monthly pay of non-residents
begins when they are placed upon the pay roll of their employer at the port of
70 So-called "hand canneries", which pack a very minor portion of the total product
of the industry, process and can salmon in a manner substantially similar to that employed
by canneries with "high-speed" mechanical equipment, the sole distinction being that a
greater proportion of the operations are performed by hand.
11 A variation fiom this practice occurs in "hand" canneries, where workers are usually
compensated on a piecework basis Hours of employment, and other working conditions
in such canneries, however, are generally comparable with those in the mechanized
canneries with which the undersigned is primarily concerned.
11 This is not true in Bristol Bay, apparently because most of the resident workers reside
at considerable distances from the canneries. In this district, room and board are
furnished to resident employees.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY , INC. 1535
embarkation , and continues until their return to a port of debarkation The
pay of resident workers normally begins when they start work at the cannery, and
ceases when their services are no longer required . According to the ASI's man-
ager , the hourly rates currently being paid to resident workers in the industry
are substantially equivalent to the compensation received by non-residents, if the
remuneration of the latter - group is computed in terms of hourly earnings; any
differences in the hourly earnings of the two groups favor the residents , and are
designed to provide that group with a rough equivalent for the value of trans-
portation and board and room furnished the non-residents.
The hours of work for residents , when employed , are the same as those of non-
residents . However, because of the different methods of computing the compen-
sation of the non -residents and residents , it appears that cannery superintend-
ents frequently tend to restrict employment to non-residents during periods of
moderate activity , since their obligation to the non -residents is a continuing one ;
while residents are employed only during periods of peak activity , when the non-
resident crew is insufficient to carry on the volume of work required . As a re-
sult, the total earnings of residents at canneries where both groups are employed,
are often considerably less than those of non-residents.
Both groups of workers receive a seasonal "guarantee . " n Non-residents are
guaranteed 2 months of employment at the fixed monthly rate, exclusive of over-
time. With respect to residents , a fixed sum , including overtime , is guaranteed
those who are required "to travel away from their homes to the cannery and
remain there for the duration of the canning season ; and a minimum number of
hours of employment , including overtime , is guaranteed those whose permanent
residence is at or near the cannery ". The guarantees for residents apply only
to those employed at the beginning of the season , "the permanent and regular
cannery crew."
The principal distinction between residents and non-residents lies in their
diverse origins and habits . The non-resident workers are recruited from the
migrant agricultural labor of the Pacific Coast States. Most of them are of
Oriental extraction . They form a relatively well -defined source of labor, as-
sembling in the late spring in the various ports of the Pacific Coast , where they
present themselves for work and hold themselves in readiness for transportation
to Alaska after clearing through the hiring hall . At the close of the season they
disperse throughout the Western States to resume their employment in agri-
cultural pursuits.
The resident workers, as a group, maintain no contact with these "outside"
workers through the major portion of the year . In Southeastern Alaska the
resident workers are principally the wives , daughters , and sons of the resident
fishermen , and are predominantly of Indian extraction . In general , they seek
employment at canneries as close as possible to the fishing grounds where the
head of the family is active. While resident workers may shift from cannery
to cannery in successive seasons, it appears that such movement of the resident
labor supply is limited , in the main , to canneries in the immediate vicinity
of the worker 's home community. Where that community is not the locale of a
union hiring hall or halls , the workers may make themselves available for
employment by communicating with the cannery superintendent directly, or
await an inquiry as to their availabiilty . The evidence indicates that cannery
superintendents , charged with , tbe responsibility for assembling a crew, generally
73 The discussion of seasonal guarantees for resident workers is based upon the provisions
of the existing agreements governing the employment of resident cannery as orkers in
Southeastern Alaska. In Bristol Bay, the only other district in which resident workers
are employed under a guarantee , regularly employed workers , as defined in the contract,
are guaranteed a fixed minimum of total earnings for the season.
1536 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR, RELATIONS BOARD
seek to determine the available supply of local labor before any determination
is made as to the number of non-resident workers who may be needed.
Even during the canning season workers in each of these groups tend to
avoid any intermingling, although this tendency is by no means uniform. Where
residents reside at the cannery, and particularly where housing is provided for
"family units," their living quarters are separated from those of the non-
residents. Practices vary between canneries regarding the maintenance of
common mess halls and participation of either or both groups in social events.
However, at some canneries, representatives of the two groups have cooperated
in the discussion and presentation of grievances and other problems.
The length of the territorial coastline 14 and the difficulties of transportation
and communication between the various settled areas of the territory, have, to a
great extent, impeded any significant interchange of ideas among resident
workers employed in the various districts already noted. While the non-resident
employees at canneries throughout the territory possess certain opportunities,
however limited, to meet before and after the season to discuss their common
problems, similar activities among resident workers are generally confined to
particular districts. Communication between districts in Alaska, and between
the various Alaskan organizations and their parent bodies in the continental
United States is carried on by their respective representatives, and has neces-
sarily been limited in the past. The record indicates, however, that there prob-
ably will be considerable improvement in this regard in the future.
5. Conclusions
a. The proposal for a combined unit of residents and non-residents
As previously noted, the FTA-CIO is the only labor organization which urges
the combination of resident and non-resident cannery workers in a single bar-
gaining unit. In support of this contention, the FTA-CIO argues, in substance,
as follows :
1. The organization of the industry : While each employer in the industry
may have special production problems, the problems of the industry have
been considered indivisible by the various governmental agencies concerned
with its operations. The development of the "Concentration Program",
and the proceedings before the WLB, are examples Companies throughout
the industry process salmon in the same fashion, and employ workers from
the same sources for similar tasks. The ASI was created, and exists, for
the express purpose of negotiating collective bargaining agreements by which
terms and conditions of employment in the industry can be stabilized
throughout the territory. Further, the ASI has manifested a desire for
the establishment of a bargaining unit or units on the broadest possible
basis consistent with efficient operations. Thus, the ASI has executed
agreements concerning fishermen, machinists, and carpenters, fixing wages,
hours, and working conditions for both residents and non-residents on an
industry-wide basis.
2. The nature of the work: Resident and non-resident cannery workers
perform the same operations and work side by side in canneries at which
both are employed. While some of the tasks require a certain degree of
skill, normally acquired by experience, most of them can be performed under
general supervision after a short period of instruction. As a result, resident
'} The canneries of the companies involved in the present case are located at various
points from the Canadian Border to the mouth of the I{uskokwim River , a distance of
approximately 2,200 miles
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1537
and non-resident workers may be and are interchanged freely in accordance
with the necessities of the moment Other working conditions for both
residents and non-residents are similar throughout the industry, except
insofar as they have been modified by contract. Hence, employees in each
group share the same problems with respect to wages, hours, and other
conditions of their employment. Lastly, employees in both categories work
under a unified supervision at each cannery in which they are employed.
3. The identity of interest in the objects of collective bargaining: A com-
bined unit on an industry-wide basis is essential to eliminate differences
in wages, hours, and working conditions between districts, and between
residents and non-residents within districts. The non-resident agreements
have set the standards for the rest of the industry, as a result of which the
present contracts for non-residents and residents in Southeastern Alaska
are markedly similar. Improvement in the working conditions of resident
workers since the inception of collective bargaining is primarily due to the
fact that the Alaskan locals of the FTA-CIO have been able to rely upon
the support of the non-residents. Where, as here, nearly all employers in
the industry are represented in collective bargaining by a single trade
association, equality of bargaining power can exist only when all of the em-
ployees in the industry present a single, unified front.
4. The need for stability in labor relations: Since operations in this indus-
try are dependent to a large extent on the accidents of nature, and for this
and other reasons are highly competitive, uniformity in matters affecting
labor relations is necessary to insure the maintenance of working standards
in the face of such competition. Frequent strikes among residents in South-
eastern Alaska have been motivated by the desire for equality of treatment;
similar instability can be avoided in the future by collective bargaining in
a combined unit.
5. The organization of the FTA-CIO: Contrary to the contention that its
organizational structure would permit the non-resident employees and their
representatives to dominate the process of collective bargaining, to the
presumed detriment, of the resident workers, the FTA-CIO's record in collec-
tive bargaining for residents, and the activities of its Southeastern Alaska
District Council, a resident organization, demonstrate the advantages of
bargaining representation by this organization in a combined unit of residents
and non-residents. The FTA-CIO's constitution permits the development of
autonomous locals for resident workers, and its certification in a territory-
wide unit would be followed necessarily by the organization of all residents
on an autonomous basis, with the right to be heard in all contract negotia-
tions affecting their interests.
6 Lack of precedent for units based on residence: No precedent can be
found in the Board's decisions for the establishment, in the face of a contrary
contention, of units based upon the residence of employees.
The ASI, and each of the other interested labor organizations, oppose the posi-
tion of the FTA-CIO. In support of their contentions for separate units of
^esident and non-resident cannery workers, these parties variously urge the
1 alidity of the following arguments :
1. Precedent: In each of the two previous cases " involving firms in the
Alaskan salmon canning industry, the Board has recognized the propriety of
separate units for residents and non-residents.
75 Matter of Alaska Packers Association, et q,l„ and Matter of Alaska Salmon Industry,
Iric,, of al ., cited, supra.
1538 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. Collective bargaining history: From the inception of collective bargaining
for resident Cannery workers in 1937, separate agreements have been nego-
tiated for resident and non-resident employees. Repeated attempts on the
part of the FTA-CIO to negotiate an agreement for a combined unit have
been rejected by the representatives of the industry. The division of the
employees into these two groups for the purpose of collective bargaining
reflects genuine differences between them with respect to the objects of col-
lective bargaining, a difference which is reflected, in turn, by the diversity of
the subjects dealt with in the respective agreements.
3. The form of piesent self-organization: The geographical situation of the
industry has required residents and non-residents to organize separately. The
distance between Alaska and the Pacific Coast States has made it impossible
for the two groups to communicate with each other or function together, and
has therefore established a necessary and logical division between autonomous
organizations of residents, with headquarters in Alaska, and organizations
of non-residents, with headquarters in the continental United States. Self-
organization along these lines is required because distance and the difficulty
of communication makes it impossible for residents to express their need
with adequate emphasis, or for the non-resident representatives to do justice
to the needs and desires of the residents. Also, this division in organization
reflects the desires of the resident employees, who see their position in the
industry challenged by the dominant organization of non-residents, which
furnishes more than one-half of all cannery workers employed in the industry.
4. Diversity of interests in the objects of collective bargaining: Non-resi-
dent workers are recruited from a "labor pool" consisting primarily of mi-
gratory agricultural laborers from the Western States, while the resident
group is composed principally of the wives and children of fishermen and
other residents of Alaskan communities. The two groups of workers are
hired in a different manner, at different rates of pay, and work under differ-
ent provisions with respect to seasonal guarantees, which in turn create
differences in the way they are assigned to work, and their respective periods
of employment. The non-resident worker is enabled, by these arrangements,
to accumulate a cash reserve in an area of high wages, which he is then
able to supplement in other seasonal industries "outside" of Alaska, or ex-
pend in "outside" areas with a lower cost of living. The resident worker, on
the other hand, is required to expend his more limited earnings in Alaska, an
area with relatively higher living costs which offers fewer opportunities
to supplement his cash income by other activities in the winter months. Of
equal importance, the resident worker has a deep and permanent interest
in the preservation of the fish runs in his own locality, as the natural re-
source on which his livelihood is based, while the non-resident worker does
not share this concern. These contrasts in the primary economic interests,
of the two groups, stemming from their divergent origins, are the justifica-
tion for separate bargaining units in which each group will be free to pursue
its special interest in collective bargaining with the industry. The wide
area covered by the FTA-CIO's proposed unit is really made up of a number
of distinct districts, each of which has problems and conditions which differ
from the others. As a result, creation of a single unit could not result in a
uniform agreement, and any such unit could soon split up because of the
diversity of interests between residents and non-residents, and between
residents in different districts.
5. Alleged discrimination against residents: The FTA-CIO, it is alleged,
has sought to establish and maintain quotas of non-resident employment in
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1539
the industry, to the detriment of the growing body of qualified, available
resident labor which was denied full opportunity for employment in the in-
dustry by these practices. Establishment of such a practice would be detri-
mental to the best interests of Alaska and its economy, which looks forward
to the development of a self-sufficient resident population. The employment
of non-resident cannery workers on any basis restricts employment oppor-
tunities in the industry for residents As the industry becomes more highly
mechanized, its manpower requirements will be reduced, as a result of which
the available supply of resident and non-resident labor will be forced into
competition for the diminished number of jobs. And since Alaska's present
development provides its population with a limited number of employment
opportunities only, Alaskans should be permitted to assert their right to
employment in the exploitation of their own natural resources
There is much merit in the arguments of the PTA-CIO. The Board has fre-
quently adverted to "the beneficial stability and uniformity likely to be achieved
by bargaining on the basis of units co-extensive with the membership of associa-
tions of competing employers in the same industry." 7a It is unquestionably true
that the nature of the work done by cannery employees throughout the industry
is substantially identical, and that they share a common interest in many aspects
of the employment relationship. The industry itself has recognized that its
problems in the field of labor relations are problems common to all the Companies,
which can best be solved by common and unified action.
However, in determining the issues presented by this case, the undersigned
feels that serious consideration must be given to criteria enunciated in the
Board's decision in Matter of The Western Union Telegraph Company." In that
case, a majority of the Board stated:
Any decision which will have the effect of eliminating an organization from
the possibility of being retained as bargaining agent by thousands of em-
ployees in a large and closely knit area, which obviously continues to be a
possible appropriate unit, must be carefully weighed; especially is this true
where the elimination is effected by broadening the voting group so that
the rival organization's strength among the electorate in distant parts of
the country makes its selection possible. This Board has, almost since its
inception, applied the rule of self-determination with respect to well-defined
groupings of employees in situations where rival unions are in dispute as
to the scope of the bargaining unit. It has recognized that even where basic
over-all conditions of employment are substantially the same, nevertheless
the efficacy of day-to-day administration of collective bargaining agreements
in specific segments of the employee group must rest in large measure with
local representatives of employees and the employer. It is obviously de-
sirable that the representative of the employees, in order to be effective and
truly representative, have a fairly evenly distributed constituency among
the various logical groupings of employees. This' is not to say, however,
that any fragment of a cohesive group will be allowed to set itself apart.
It would indeed be unfortunate to jeopardize future bargaining relation-
ships by finding, at this time a nation-wide unit which might reasonably
result in imposing on certain large and coherent groups a new representa-
tive. It seems to us to work no hardships or to violate any principles of
the Act to require any contending organization to demonstrate the adherence
"The quotation is from the Board's Decision in Matter of The Lamson Brothers
Company, 59 N L. R B. 1561.
11 58 N. L It. B. 1283.
1540 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of the electorate in a fashion which allows the electorate to register a choice.
Eventual stability in bargaining will be better served by building firmly and
gradually. Nothing in our finding of divisional units precludes later merging
under appropriate circumstances.
Adoption of the contention of the FTA-CIO would require the Board to obliter-
ate well-defined groupings founded upon the historical pattern of employee or-
ganization and collective bargaining, and recognized in collective agreements.
The FTA-CIO has submitted evidence of representation among non-residents
employed throughout the Territory, and residents employed in the Southeastern
and Peninsula Districts ; however, its evidence of representation among the
residents in the Bristol Bay District antedates similar evidence presented by
the IFAWA-CIO, and it has presented no evidence of representation among
resident employees in the Cook Inlet, Copper River and Prince William Sound,
and Kodiak-Afognak Districts, well-defined areas in which labor organizations
which are parties to collective agreements are functioning. A merger of such
areas within a single, territory-wide unit should be accomplished, the under-
signed believes, only if considerations of over-all unity present ineluctable rea-
sons to disregard established relationships and patterns of collective
bargaining.is In the opinion of the undersigned , although considerations of
unity are present in this case, they are not controlling. The feasibility of bar-
gaining for resident workers in units separate from those including non-residents
has been demonstrated by a history of collective bargaining dating back, in
nearly all instances, to the inception of employee organization in the industry.
A unit finding which disregards the historical relationships between the industry
and its employees might result in the imposition of a new and unwanted repre-
sentative on well-defined and coherent groups of resident workers, and endanger
the future course of collective bargaining on their behalf. For these reasons,`
the undersigned will recommend that the contention of the FTA-CIO be rejected,
and that separate bargaining units be established for resident and non-resident
cannery workers8°
78 The undersigned is of the opinion that considerations of overall unity were present
to an even greater degree in the Western Union ease, and that a finding of a single, system-
wide unit in that case would not necessarily compel a finding of a single, industry-wide
unit in this case Among other considerations , in the Western Union case the Board's
decision involved an enterprise highly integrated in function and centralized in administra-
tion-an enterprise in which no established patterns of collective bargaining had evolved
and which substantially all labor organizations concerned had sought to organize on a
system -wide basis The instant case involves , among other things, well -defined geographical
groupings which are spread over a broad area , between which there are limited facilities
for communication , and in which well -established patterns of collective bargaining have
evolved.
7e In rejecting the request of the FTA-CIO for an industry-wide unit , the undersigned,
as indicated by the discussion above , has attached no importance to certain of the argu-
ments of the other parties . For example , the undersigned has given no weight to the
assertions that certification of the FTA -CIO as statutory representative in an industry-
wide unit would result in subversion of resident to non-resident interests or, in this con-
nection, that the FTA-CIO in the past has discriminated against residents Even if it
be assumed that such discrimination is a relevant consideration , the undersigned is of the
opinion that the record does not establish that such was the case.
80 In the opinion of the undersigned , acceptance of this recommendation by the Board
would not require continuation of collective bargaining on the basis of established relation-
ships for all time. The recommendation of the undersigned is founded upon the belief that
eventual stability in bargaining will be best served by gradual change , based upon the
consent of the employees . Nothing in the present recommendation , or findings based upon
it, should preclude later merger of any resident or non-resident units under appropriate
circumstances. -
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1541
b The appropriate units of non -resident cannery workers
At the hearing , the FTA-CIO requested that, in the event that non-resident and
resident cannery workers are not combined for bargaining purposes , a territory-
wide unit of all non -resident cannery workers employed by the Members and the
Independents be established . The SIU-AFL , the only other labor organization
which claims to represent non-resident cannery workers , urges that - separate
units of non -residents at each cannery are appropriate , and that, in the event
that this contention is not sustained , district-wide units of non-residents are
appropriate . The ASI agrees with the alteiuative position of the FTA-CIO that
a territory-wide unit of all non -residents is appropriate.
The history of collective bargaining on behalf of the non -resident cannery
workers in the industry establishes the propriety of a territory -wide unit com-
posed of employees of the Members. Since the inception of collective bargaining
in 1936, substantially all negotiations concerning the wages , hours, and working
conditions of the non -residents have been conducted on a territory -wide basis
by the FTA-CIO or its predecessor , Local 18257 , and the ASI or its predecessor,
the CSI . These negotiations have resulted in exclusive bargaining contracts,
territory -wide in scope, between the parties named above. The propriety of a
territory-wide unit has been recognized by Locals 18257 and 20454, the prede-
cessors of the SIU-AFL , 81 in the consent election agreement of 1938, and by the
conduct of the SIU-AFL in incorporating , without variation , the terms and con-
ditions of the non -resident contract between 'the FTA-CIO and the ASI in its
contracts with individual Companies.
Notwithstanding the foregoing , the fact that certain Members have custom-
arily requisitioned non-resident employees from the SIU -AFL presents the issue
as to whether the non-resident employees of these Members should be excluded
from the scope of the territory -wide unit . While in certain decisions the Board
has applied the rule of self-determination to well -defined groupings of employees
in situations where rival unions are in dispute as to the scope of the bargaining
unit, the undersigned is of the opinion that the considerations which impelled
these rulings do not govern the peculiar situation here presented In those cases,
it appeared , among other things, that the groupings of employees , to which the
rule of self-determination was applied, were groupings well-defined in terms of
geographical or other criteria ordinarily used in fixing the bounds of a bargain-
ing unit ; that the union which had acquired the status of statutory representative
in a broader unit subsuming the smaller groups had failed to extend its organi-
zation to employees within such groups ; that the employees within the groupings
had refused to participate or acquiesce in the bargaining which was conducted
in the broader unit; that these employees affirmatively had engaged in negotia-
tion in disregard of the negotiations of the representative of the broader unit;
and that the employees themselves , in the foregoing and other respects, had
demonstrated their desire for representation through an organization different
from the exclusive representative of the broader unit.
Viewed realistically , the present situation is plainly distinguishable In the
first place, the non-residents employed in the Alaskan salmon canning industry
are recruited from a single pool of employees . As set forth above, these workers
have been composed largely of migratory agricultural workers in the Western
States, who make themselves available for employment in the spring of each
81 As appears in Section IV, A, 3, a, above , non-resident cannery workers have been repre-
gented by the AFCWU-AFh. For convenience however , this organization is referred to In
this subsection as the SIU-AFL
$a See, e. g., Matter of Shipowners Association of the Pacific Coast, 32 N L . It B 608
[hatter of Libby-Owens -Ford Glass Co , 31 N. L. R. B 243.
1542 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
year at ports in the Pacific Coast States a' to which they return at the close
of the fishing season. While many non-residents return each year to
the same cannery, there is considerable change from year to year in the can-
neries at which they are employed. In sum, all the non-resident cannery
workers in the industry constitute a single group of employees who are closely
related by geographical origin, function, and skill Secondly, it appears that the
organizational division in the ranks of the non-residents stems mainly from the
choice of the employers rather than that, of the employees. It is the practice in
the industry to hire non-resident cannery employees by requisitioning from union
hiring halls a certain number of workers in specified classifications.°} Accord-
ingly, it is largely the choice of the employer as to whether his non-resident
employees shall be members of the PTA-CIO or the SIU-AFL. There is no
showing that the practice of the Members who requisition from the SIU-AFL has
been motivated by ' the desires of any defined group or groups of employees.
Finally, it is plain that the Members who have requisitioned from the SIU-AFL
have accepted the benefits of their representation by the ASI by incorporating
substantially all the terms of the agreements reached by the ASI and the PTA-CIO
into their individual agreements with the SIU-AFL. The ASI, in accordance
with its bylaws, has authority to and presumably does, bargain for all its mem-
bers. That the ASI does not consider the execution by its members of identical
contracts with the SIU-AFL a breach of the bylaws merely constitutes recognition
of a situation which had existed prior to its formation and which had stemmed
from the choice of the employers, rather than that of the employees.
In the light of the considerations set forth above, it is clear that to establish
separate units of non-resident cannery workers of each of the Members or to
establish separate units of non-residents employed by each of the Members who
have requisitioned from the SIU-AFL, would be contrary to the 1938 consent
election agreement and to the history of collective bargaining, would be supported
93 As set forth in footnote 35, supra, in years prior to the war, these ports included San
Francisco, Portland, Seattle, and Bellingham , at the present, nearly all non-residents
are hired at Seattle. There is no contention or showing that the non-resident cannery
workers fall within groupings based upon the different ports at which they formerly were
hired. Compare Matter of Shipowners Association of the Pacific Coast, 32 N L R B 668
"' The hiring procedures set forth in the 1942 contract between the FTA-CIO and the
ASI are, so far as material here, as follows :
(a) The Company shall procure all employees not residents of Alaska who come
under the Jurisdiction of the Union through the Union headquarters or the Union
hiring halls
(b) The Company agrees to notify the Union fifteen (15) days prior to tentative
sailing dates of the number of lines to be operated at one time and the number and
type of cannery workers it requires, provided an agreement has been signed between
the Industry and the Union at that time The Union will furnish standard forms
for the use of the Company in making such notifications.- The Union, may make
such suggestions as it may desire to the Company representatives for their considera-
tion concerning the personnel to be furnished at the various canneries
s e s s s s
(d) The Company shall at its option designate its foreman or representative who
Is a member of the Industry and who has no connection directly or indirectly with
any labor contracting agency, who will work with the Union's representative in
lining up of crews. Preference shall be given to those on the 1941 pay rolls of the
Company who are members of the Union in good standing or who worked on permits
during the 1941 season In lining up of crews the Union will, if the Company so
desires, furnish employees of the previous season to the extent such employees are
available and willing to return to such previous season's operations
s s w s • s *
(f) In the event those employees selected are not members of the Union, . they
shall be issued an official permit by the Union. At the time of departure for Alaska
such employees shall be either members of the Union or have received a Dermit.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1543
only by the fortuitous choice of certain employers, and would be unsupported by
any groupings based upon geography, function, or skill.
. The undersigned concludes that a unit composed of all non-resident cannery
workers employed by the Members is appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining
With respect to the Independents, substantially all who employ non-resident
cannery workers have requisitioned these employees from either the FTA-CIO
or the SIU-AFL, and these Independents have bound themselves, either by
written memorandum or oral understanding, to the terms of the non-resident
contracts executed by the FTA-CIO and the ASI. In a recent decision,' the Board,
under similar circumstances, held as follows :
. . . we are not persuaded that the history of collective bargaining in the
area compels a finding that the employees of the Independents should be part
of this [area -wide ] bargaining unit. There is no evidence that the Independ-
ents participated in the negotiations between the Association, acting on behalf
of the Members, and the C. I. O. Without any semblance of bargaining, the
Independents signed agreements identical tq those executed by the Members.
This course of conduct cannot be considered as true collective bargaining
on an area-wide basis covering employees of both the Members and the
Independents, particularly since the Independents were in no way obligated
to follow the Association's lead. We conclude, therefore, that the employees
of each Independent comprise a separate appropriate unit.
The observations of the Board in the above case are entirely apposite to the
situation here involved. Accordingly, the undersigned finds that the non-resident
cannery workers of each Independent constitute a separate appropriate unit.
c. The appropriate units of resident cannery workers
In accordance with its general contention that the largest possible unit of
cannery workers in the industry is appropriate, the FTA-CIO contends that, in
the event that non-resident and resident cannery workers are not combined for
bargaining purposes, a territory -wide unit of all resident cannery workers em-
ployed by the Members and the Independents is appropriate. The IFAWA-CIO
contends that district-wide units of resident cannery workers in three of the six
districts set forth above-Bristol Bay, Cook Inlet, and Copper River and Prince
William Sound-are appropriate' The SIU-AFL asserts that resident cannery
workers at each cannery comprise separate appropriate units. The ANB urges
the establishment of separate units of employees at 22 canneries in the South-
eastern District.B9 The ASI would favor the establishment of a territory-wide
unit of resident cannery workers provided, in brief, that adequate representation
is accorded all component groups within such a unit. In the absence of a com-
mitment by the unions involved "to put such a representative plan into effect in
case they win the election", the ASI contends that cannery workers in each of
the six districts mentioned above constitute separate appropriate units.
85 Nor is there any historical or functional basis for adopting the alternative contention
of the SIU-AFL that non-residents should be grouped in district-wide units.
88 Hatter of Advance Tanning Company, et al , 60 N L. R B 923
87 The IFAWA-CIO takes no position respecting the appropriate units for resident
cannery workers in the three remaining districts , Southeastern , Kodiak-Afognak, and
Peninsula . However, in the event that its contention for certain district -wide units is
not sustained , the IFAWA-CIO urges the establishment of a territory-wide unit of residents
88 The SIU-AFL states that district-wide units are the next most appropriate units
89 Next in order of appropriateness , states the ANB, is a unit of all employees in the
Southeastern District. It does not , however, request a certification of representatives
in such a unit
1544 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The arguments advanced in support of the contention for a territory-wide
unit of resident cannery workers are, to the extent applicable to this problem,
the same as those mentioned heretofore in connection with the FTA-CIO's con-
tention for an industry-wide unit.
The arguments for the appropriateness of separate cannery units were mainly
those advanced by the ANB in support of its request for the establishment of units
of employees at each of 22 canneries in the Southeastern District. The ANB's
arguments appear to be, in brief, substantially as follows : That the employees
at each cannery are inherently an appropriate group for bargaining purposes;
that the ANB in fact has bargained upon an individual cannery basis; that varying
conditions of employment at different canneries require that each cannery be
considered individually ; and that bargaining on a district-wide or broader basis
is economically detrimental to the ANB, whereas bargaining upon a cannery-to-
cannery basis has increased and would increase its bargaining strength. More
particularly, the last-mentioned argument is premised upon the following alleged
considerations : (1) Bargaining upon a district-wide basis permits the ASI, a
strong and well-organized association of employers, to negotiate uniform wages
throughout the Southeastern District. The bargaining strength of the ASI on a
district-wide basis enables it to maintain low wages. On the other hand, bar-
gaining on an individual cannery basis enables the ANB to concentrate its strength
upon a single cannery and thus to obtain higher wages at this point. Once this
is achieved, there is a tendency by other canneries to follow suit, resulting in
higher wages throughout the district. (2) The fishing season varies in dif-
ferent fishing areas in the Southeastern District. In the northern area the
season is approximately half completed when the season starts in the southern
area. In the northern area, the canneries are generally geographically separated
by considerable distances , resulting in a lack of competition between canneries in
purchasing salmon from fishermen Consequently, the minimum fish prices which
are negotiated at the start of the season for the Southeastern District tend to
become maximum prices in the northern area.' In the southern area, particularly
in and about Ketchikan, canneries are located in close proximity, permitting
competition by the canneries in purchasing fish. As a result, competitive bid-
ding for the fishermen's catch as the season progresses often results in higher
prices. Fish prices and wages of cannery workers, both of which are important
factors in the cost of the product, are closely interrelated. A rise in one tends
to cause a corresponding reduction in the other. Fishermen and cannery work-
ers are frequently members of a "family unit", the term used by the ANB to de-
scribe the relationship resulting from the practice, which is quite common in the
industry, whereby the wife and children of a fisherman work at the cannery to
which the fisherman sells his catch. Since the fishing season in the northern
area ordinarily has been completed or is nearing completion by the time that
competitive bidding in the southern area raises fish prices, the ANB asserts
that, if minimum fish prices and cannery wages are fixed uniformly by bargain-
ing on a district-wide basis, it is unable to take advantage of the differentials in
fish prices between the northern and southern areas to secure an increase in the
"family unit" income in the northern area either through increased prices for
the fishermen or increased wages for the cannery workers. On the other hand,
states the ANB, bargaining on a cannery-to-cannery basis would assist it to con-
trol the northern operators to recognize the fish-price differentials through in-
creases either in fish prices or cannery worker wages.
The undersigned does not regard as persuasive the arguments of the ANB.
Insofar as the history of bargaining is concerned, it is clear that, excepting a
few contracts executed by the ANB and individual cannery operators prior to
1942, substantially all contracts for resident cannery workers, including the 1944
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1545
contract between the ASI and the ANB, have been negotiated upon a district-
wide basis. With respect to the alleged variation in working conditions at
various canneries, the undersigned is of the opinion that the contrary is in fact
the case The functions and duties of cannery workers throughout the industry
are remarkably uniform. When questioned concerning this subject, counsel
for the ANB specified only housing and sanitation as subjects which required
negotiation concerning individual canneries rather than negotiation on a district-
wide basis ; he in effect conceded that wages and other working conditions could
be treated properly on a district-wide basis D° The district-wide contracts in
Southeastern Alaska provide generally for suitable living conditions and adequate
sanitation. Any dispute concerning the maintenance of these standards is a
subject which properly can be accorded individual treatment through grievance
procedures or other negotiation within the framework of a district-wide agree-
ment. Insofar as the ANB argues that establishment of separate cannery units
will strengthen its bargaining position, the undersigned believes that this con-
tention, at least to some extent, misconceives the effect of the Board's certifica-
tion. The designation by the Board of a bargaining representative in a unit
limited to employees of a single enterprise does not necessarily preclude the
selection of a trade association to represent the employer in negotiations.
Finally, even if it be assumed that the bargaining strength of one of several
competing unions is a relevant consideration in determining the appropriate unit,
the undersigned concludes that the advantages of bargaining on a district-wide
basis in the circumstances of this case outweigh this consideration.
Upon the entire record, the undersigned is satisfied that separate district-
wide units of resident cannery workers employed by the Members are appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining. The history of collective bar-
gaining, to the extent reflected by the record, reveals that bargaining has fol-
lowed separate and distinct patterns in the six districts which have been
established and which are generally recognized in the industry. Although
collective contracts or oral agreements have at times been consummated on
an individual cannery basis, such individual agreements generally have con-
formed inter se within a particular district or with agreements district-wide in
scope, and most of the agreements in fact have been district-wide in coverage.
Further, as pointed out above, the FTA-CIO has not extended its organization
among resident cannery workers to large portions of the industry in which other
labor organizations having collective contracts are functioning. While, as stated
before, the FTA-CIO makes persuasive arguments in support of its position,
the undersigned is of the opinion that the history of collective bargaining and
the considerations upon which the Board relied in the Western Union case,
are decisive of the issue.
00 The ANB's representative testified, inter alia:
The particular problem I have in mind is with respect to housing conditions which
are generally pretty bad at the cannery. So, in order to apply the contract further,
negotiations have been carried on with individual canneries as to housing conditions
We would prefer to have contracts drawn up plant by plant, all of which, of course,
naming the same pay scale, but which would describe with particularity the differentia-
tion in housing conditions at the particular cannery.
s i C • i # R
Q In response to questions with respect to the particular terms of a normal bar-
gaining agreement which should be the subject of individual negotiations, you indi-
cated, I believe, that the setting of a uniform wage scale for cannery labor through-
out Southeastern Alaska might perhaps be proper-that the setting of uniform condi-
tions might perhaps be proper, but that any particular housing conditions would have
to be handled on a plant by plant basis ; is that correct?
A. Yes.
1546 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
With respect to the Southeastern District,91 it is true that the district-wide
contracts have been applicable only to members of the three labor organizations
which are parties to such contracts. Nevertheless, each of these organizations
has extended its organization to various °areas within the district and each
has shown substantial evidence of representation in the, district considered
as a whole. The substantially uniform contracts executed by these organizations
and the ASI, though applicable only to members of the organizations, reflect
the desirability and feasibility of collective bargaining on a district-wide basis
in Southeastern Alaska.
The undersigned concludes thtit all resident cannery workers employed by the
members, in the Bristol Bay, Peninsula,92 Kodiak-Afognak, Cook Inlet, Copper
River and Prince William Sound,°2 and Southeastern Districts constitute, re-
spectively, separate appropriate units.
With respect to the Independents, substantially the same situation prevailing
with respect to their non-resident cannery workers exists regarding their resi-
dent cannery workers. Accordingly, for the reasons stated in the previous sub-
section, the undersigned concludes that all resident cannery workers employed
by each. of the Independents constitute a separate appropriate unit.°i
B. Composition, of the appropriate nails
1. Contentions
The FTA-CIO defines in the following fashion the classification of employees
who compose the alleged appropriate unit:
All cannery workers . . . working at the canning, processing, and han-
dling of fish from the time the fish are run on the conveyor to the fish bin,
and the several operations until the finished product is canned, labeled, and
packed in cartons or cases and delivered to the warehouses or vessels This
includes the making of cans, boxes and cartons, operation and feeding of
the following machines, but not the installation, upkeep or maintenance :
Iron chinks, gang knives, butchers or cutters, filling machine (feeders and
helpers), clinchers, reformers, slitters, can body machines, pasting machines,
11 The record in this proceeding indicates that Yakutat, an isolated community some
100 miles north of the main poition of Southeastern Alaska, is considered a part of the
Southeastern District ; that the contracting parties have construed the similar members-
only contracts covering the Southeastern District between the ASI and, respectively, the
FTA-CIO, the SIU-AFL, and the ANB to apply to the one cannery located at Yakutat,
and that the Company operating this cannery has observed the terms of these contracts
Accordingly, the undersigned finds that Yakutat is within the Southeastern District Cf
Matter of Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc , et at, 33 N. L R B 737.
m Although, so far as appears , there has been no collective bargaining for resident
cannery workers in the Peninsula District on a district-wide basis, the FTA-CIO, the
only union which has made a showing of representation therein, presumably desires a
district -wide unit of residents rather than separate cannery units, and the ASI agrees
that a district-wide unit is appropriate. In view of this and the history of collective
bargaining in the other districts, the undersigned will recommend that a unit of resident
cannery workers of the Members in the Peninsula District be found appropriate
n See footnote 94, infra
94 As appears above, certain of the Independents in the Copper River and Prince William
Sound District have participated with Members in negotiations leading to the execution
by all such Companies of a uniform agreement In these circumstances , it appears that
the resident cannery workers of these Independents might properly be included within a
district -wide unit with residents employed by the Members Cf . Matter of Advance Tanning
Company, 60 N. L. It. B. 923; see Matter of George F. Carleton if Company , Inc., et at.,
54 N. L. It. B 222 Inasmuch as the undersigned has found in Section III, above , that no
question of representation concerning resident cannery workers exists in the Copper
River and Prince William Sound District , it is unnecessary to decide this question.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1547
casing machines, stitching machines, and all work that has been done cus-
tomarily heretofore which does not conflict with any work heretofore per-
formed by the Machinists' Union, and including cannery worker Foremen,
Second Foremen, Utility men, Department heads, cannery worker time-
keepers, cannery worker cooks, bakers, bull cooks and culinary help, but
excluding machinists, carpenters, radio operators, office employees, doctors
and nurses, winter watchmen,9e superintendents, assistant superintendents,
cannery foremen, and company timekeepers, and/or bookkeepers.
The definition of the FTA-CIO comports, in the main, with the coverage of
contracts in the industry governing the conditions of employment of cannery
workers." The other parties agree to the inclusions and exclusions proposed by
the FTA-CIO, with the exceptions and qualifications discussed below.
2. Disputed job categories
a. Pre-season and post-season employees
Before the commencement of the fishing season, there are a number of tasks
which must be performed at or in the vicinity of the cannery in preparation for
the activities conducted during the season ; similarly, following the close of the
season, there is various work to be performed before the cannery can be shut
down. Thus, before the season starts, fish traps are constructed or assembled ;
boats are made ready for use ; fishing gear is taken from storage and repaired,
treated, and assembled ; cannery buildings and appurtenances are cleaned and
repaired ; machinery and other apparatus inside the buildings are inspected
and arranged or otherwise placed in readiness for processing and canning opera-
tions ; supplies are unloaded and stored ; and a variety of other similar or inci-
dental tasks are performed. Following the close of the fishing season, the prod-
ucts of the cannery are transferred to ships for delivery ; fish traps are disman-
tled; fishing gear is treated and stored; buildings, machinery, and apparatus are
cleaned; and other work necessary to closing the cannery is done. In general,
to the extent that the above-mentioned work is performed on real and personal
property, of the cannery,"" it is done by persons hired by the cannery operator.
These persons ordinarily are those who, during the season, fall within the two
groups previously mentioned: (1) Those primarily engaged in catching and
transporting fish; and (2) those primarily engaged in processing and handling
fish within the cannery. The first group is composed mainly (a) of persons
who construct, maintain and operate fish traps and (b) of persons who fish
with seines or nets from purse seine and gill-net boats. The persons whose
principal activity during the season concerns the catching and transporting of
fish ordinarily engage mainly in pre-season work which is related and prepara-
tory to such activity ; similarly, the cannery workers perform principally pre-
95Presumably, the International Association of Machinists, affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, herein called the Machinists. The concept of "work heretofore per-
formed by the Machinists ' Union" is based upon historical practice and bargaining , is well
understood, and has been applied by the employer and employee representatives without
dispute.
"'Winter watchmen are persons who act as caretakers of canneries during the winter.
The conditions of employment of night watchmen employed during the canning season
are governed by contracts to which the Machinists is a party. No request was made by
any party for the inclusion of night watchmen ; presumably , all parties are agreed that
they should be excluded, and the undersigned will so recommend
"T Variations, if any, in the PTA-CIO's definition and in the coverage of the contracts
are mentioned in the discussion of the disputed job categories which follows.
98 Many fishermen own their boa's and gear.
1548 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
season work related to their principal activity during the season. This is also
true with respect to the performance of post-season work. However, there is at
times some interchange and overlapping between fishermen and cannery workers
in the performance of pre-season and post-season work. Except as stated above,
the assignment to the various tasks performed before and after the season
follows no definite pattern and depends to a large extent upon the immediate
requirements of the cannery. Accordingly, a worker may perform several differ-
ent tasks in a single day.
The ANB would include, and all other parties would exclude, the following
classifications of employees:
All resident Alaska pre-season workers, in and about shore plants and
floating salmon canneries, engaged in cleaning buildings of all kinds and
yards surrounding such buildings, repairing such buildings, and the con-
tents thereof, arranging machines, apparatus and fixtures, in and about
said buildings ; repairing docks, foundations, conveyors and elevators where
such canneries customarily can seine-caught salmon exclusively; ditch-
digging and other common laboring including repair of power- and water-
supply main-pipelines before entry into the cannery buildings; purse-seine
and other seine web men ;°° pile-driver crews at canneries customarily
canning seine-caught fish exclusively ; gill-net web men ; 10° and miscellaneous
workers ; and longshoremen ; designated as "pre-season" workers and hired
after April 1 for the ensuing season, and
All resident Alaska post-season workers, in and about shore plants and
floating salmon canneries, engaged in work identical or similar in general
nature to pre-season workers .. .
Broadly stated, it is the position of the ANB, in substance, that regardless of
whether the persons in question work during the fishing season inside the can-
neries processing and handling fish or outside the canneries catching and trans-
porting fish, all pre-season and post-season workers should be included within a
unit of cannery workers, excepting employees who perform certain types of
pre-season and post-season work in canneries which can trap-caught fish.
The history of the Alaskan salmon canning industry reflects a traditional
dichotomy with respect to the fixing of the terms and conditions under which the
two groups previously mentioned work. The working conditions of those prin-
cipally engaged in catching and transporting fish generally have been fixed in
the past either by fish price agreements 101 or by collective contracts between the
cannery operators and various labor unions or other organizations. 102 Most of
these agreements have contained provisions governing the pre-season and post-
season work performed by this group of employees. The terms and conditions
of employment of the employees engaged during the season in processing and
handling fish-the inside cannery workers-have been governed by the contracts
00 These are the persons who repair, treat, and assemble seine gear.
100 These persons repair , treat, and assemble gear used in gill -net fishing.
301 The ASI concedes that persons employed in connection with trap operations are
employees , but take the position that fishermen who operate certain other types of gear
are not employees . • With respect to the fishermen last mentioned , it appears that the
IFAWA-CIO takes a contrary position . It is unnecessary in this proceeding to determine
this issue.
102 The record indicates that this group of employees is represented , for the most part,
by the AFU-CIO and other affiliates of the IFAWA-CIO ; by Cannery Tendermen 's Union
of Alaska and Puget Sound, Alaska Salmon Purse Seiners' Union , and other affiliates of
the SIU-AFL ; or by the Alaska Fishermen 's Cooperative Association , affiliated with
the ANB.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1549
discussed at length heretofore. Most of these contracts contain provisions fixing
wages for certain types of pre-season and post-season work. It is plain from the
contracts and from other evidence adduced at the hearing that these provisions
apply, and have been construed to apply, only to the employees who work inside
the cannery during the fishing season.
The arguments advanced by the ANB in support of its request for the inclusion
of pre-season and post-season employees within the unit appear to be substantially
as follows : The economic interests of resident fishermen and cannery workers
are inseparable since fishing and canning are interdependent and integrated
operations, and since each fisherman and cannery worker is ordinarily a member
of a "family unit", which, as previously stated, is a term used by the ANB to
describe the relationship resulting from the practice, which is quite common in
the industry, whereby the wife and children of a fisherman are employed
as cannery workers at the cannery to which the fisherman sells his catch. Al-
though fishermen, while engaged in catching fish, are not employees within the
meaning of the Act and accordingly cannot be included within a unit of cannery
employees, they are employees while engaged in pre-season and post-season work
and, to this extent, should be included within the unit. The inclusion of work-
ers performing certain types of pre-season and post-season work should be
limited, however, to canneries "customarily canning seine-caught salmon ex-
clusively." This distinction between seine-caught and trap-caught fish is justi-
fied by the fact that the ANB and its members consider the use of traps inimical
to their economic interests and, accordingly, the members ordinarily do not per-
form work in connection with trap operations Further, the labor organizations
which, by internal regulation and by contract, claim jurisdiction over pre-season
and post-season work performed by persons engaged in catching and transporting
fish, regardless of whether such activity involves the use of traps or of other gear,
have not in fact extended their organization to residents performing pre-season
and post-season work in canneries in Southeastern Alaska at which seine-caught
fish are canned. And, finally, since trap employees and purse-seine or gill-net
fishermen have opposing interests by reason of the competition between the type
of gear they operate, it is improper, by excluding fishermen who use seines and
gill-nets from a cannery workers' unit, to force them into organizations which
represent employees who are engaged in trap operations.
The ASI, the IFAWA-CIO, the FTA-CIO, and the SIU-AFL oppose the claim
of the ANB. It is their position, in substance, that the definition of pre-season
and post-season employees whom the ANB would include is too vague and
indefinite; that the definition in certain respects is susceptible of interpretation
which would result in impinging upon the jurisdiction of various other unions,
which jurisdiction has long been established by contract and custom in the
industry; that in other respects the definition plainly cuts across established
jurisdictional lines ; that, insofar as the ANB's definition is based upon a
distinction between seine-caught and trap-caught fish, it is impractical and
unworkable, since canneries can, and often do, take action resulting in change
from the use of trap-caught fish to the use of seine-caught fish and vice versa ;
and, finally, that to attempt to change long-established and well-understood
jurisdictional lines, particularly by a definition as vague as that of the ANB,
would be productive of strife and uncertainty in the industry.
The undersigned finds merit in the position of the ASI, the IFAWA-CIO, the
FTA-CIO, and the SIU-AFL. The record establishes that, as a result of the
history of collective bargaining in the industry, the jurisdictional limits of
the various craft and industrial unions which are patties to contracts have
639678-45-vol. 61-99
1550 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
been channelized. While, respecting pre-season work, the contracts to some
extent do not define precisely the limits of jurisdiction, long-established custom
has resulted in well-understood delimitation. As set forth above, the principal
portion of the pre-season and post-season work performed by persons engaged
in fishing activity during the season is related and incidental to the latter
activity. Although it appears that the fishermen perform some pre-season and
post-season work related to cannery operations, assignment to such work often
is sporadic and uncertain as to time or type of work. Accordingly, to the
limited extent that the fishermen's pre-season and post-season work is related
to cannery operations, the undersigned considers it impractical, if not impossible,
to define the degree to which such work falls within the scope of a cannery
workers' unit. That the adoption of the ANB's attempted definition would en-
gender unrest and confusion is reflected by the varied interpretations put
upon the ANB's proposal by witnesses and representatives at the bearing.
Moreover, to the extent that the ANB's definition is based upon a distinction
between canneries using seine-caught and trap-caught fish, the undersigned is
of the opinion that its contention is based upon a criterion of little relevancy
to the determination of the appropriate unit. Upon the basis of the foregoing
and the entire record, the undersigned is satisfied and finds that the pre-season
and post-season employment of persons engaged in fishing activity during the
season properly falls outside the scope of collective bargaining for cannery
workers The undersigned accordingly rejects the contention of the ANB."
b. Cannery worker foremen and second foremen
The FTA-CIO, the IFAWA-CIO, and the SIU-AFL would include cannery
worker foremen, often referred to as first foremen, and second foremen. The
ASI does not object to their inclusion within a unit limited to non-resident
employees, but would exclude them from any unit of resident employees. The
ANB also would exclude them from any unit in which it asserts an interest.
Each cannery is in charge of a cannery foreman or general foreman, who is
in charge of all cannery operations. The general foreman is ordinarily a ma-
chinist, whose terms and conditions of employment are governed by contracts
with the Machinists. Under the supervision of the general foreman is the
cannery worker foreman. The latter is directly in charge of all inside cannery
workers, numbering on occasion as many as 150. He plans and directs the
work of his subordinates, ordinarily devotes all his time to supervision, and
possesses authority to recommend the hire and discharge of employees and to
transfer and discipline employees Second foremen are employed to assist the
cannery worker foremen at certain large canneries where, because of the size
of the operation, the first foreman requires aid in the performance of his duties.
In contrast to the non-supervisory employees, who are paid on an hourly or
monthly basis and receive overtime wages, the cannery worker foremen and
second foremen are paid a fixed sum for the season, without additional
remuneration for overtime work.
The cannery worker foreman acts as a liaison between the cannery workers
and the general foreman. His services in this regard are i;equired, especially
103 By so finding, the undersigned does not intend to imply that the statutory representa-
tive of a bargaining unit of cannery workers shall not have the authority to represent per
sons employed as cannery workers during the season with respect to their terms and con-
ditions of employment while performing pre-season and post-season work. The under
signed merely has rejected the contention of the ANB to the extent that such contention
is premised upon the inclusion of pre-season and post-season workers who are not
employed as inside cannery workers during the season.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1551
respecting the non-residents, by the fact that most of the employees have as
their native tongue languages other than English and possess other racial
characteristics with which he is familiar."' The cannery worker foreman is
ordinarily recruited from the labor pool which supplies non-supervisory workers.
Since the inception of collective bargaining in the industry in 1936, cannery
worker foremen and second foremen have been included within the terms of all
collective contracts for non-resident cannery. workers. With respect to the
various contracts for resident cannery workers which have been mentioned
above, it appears that there has not been the same uniform coverage of cannery
worker foremen and second foremen. In Bristol Bay, the 1942 and 1944 agree-
ments made no specific provision for the terms and conditions of employment
of cannery worker foremen or second foremen. Presumably, however, employees
in this category were not hired from among residents of Alaska, but instead were
among the "key" employees recruited in the Pacific Coast States On the
Peninsula it also appears that, at the two canneries where there has been
collective bargaining , the employment of the cannery worker foremen and
second foremen, if any, have been governed by the non-resident contracts. In
the Kodiak-Afognak District, none of the resident agreements, by their terms,
appear to cover the wages or other working conditions of cannery worker
foremen or second foremen. Nor, so far as appears, have resident contracts at
Cook Inlet purported to fix the terms of employment of cannery worker foremen
or second foremen. In the Copper River and Prince William Sound District,
however, the 1942 contract of Local No 10 of the IFAWA-CIO covers "fore-
men" and "foreladies." 106 As appears above, collective bargaining in South-
eastern Alaska has been conducted by the ANB and various affiliates of the
FTA-CIO and SIU-AFL. The above-mentioned contracts executed by the ANB
and various individual Companies in 1941 and prior years do not include can-
nery worker foremen and second foremen within their terms However, these
employees were included within the terms of the model form of contract pro-
posed by the ANB in 1942 and the contract which it and the ASI executed in
1944. The various contracts for resident cannery workers to which the various
affiliates of the FTA-CIO and the SIU-AFL in Southeastern Alaska have been
parties since 1937 have included within their terms, either expressly or by
implication, cannery worker foremen and second foremen
From the foregoing and upon the entire record, the undersigned is satisfied that
the history of collective bargaining reveals a practice recognized throughout the
industry of including cannery worker foremen and second foremen in bargaining
units of non-supervisory cannery workers. While it is true that in isolated
instances , mainly of early date, cannery worker foremen were not specifically
named in contracts for resident cannery workers, the undersigned does not con-
sider that such omission negates the existence of a substantially uniform practice.
Since the employees in the industry in the early period of collective bargaining
were predominantly non-residents and since residents and non-residents work
under common supervision, the undersigned is of the opinion that the failure
to specify cannery worker foremen and second foremen in the terms of the
resident contracts was caused substantially by the fact that the inclusion of the
foremen in the non-resident contracts made their specific inclusion in the resident
contracts unnecessary. Notwithstanding the fact that the cannery worker fore-
men and second foremen exercise substantial supervisory authority, in view of the
101 The non -resident employees are mainly Filipinos ; the resident employees are mainly
Indians.
106 As previously stated, the record does not contain any contracts executed prior to 1942
for cannery workers in the Copper River and Prince William Sound District.
1552 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
peculiar relationship between these employees and the non-supervisory employees
which is reflected in the history of collective bargaining on behalf of both groups
within the same bargaining unit, the undersigned will recommend that the
cannery worker foremen and second foremen be included within the appropriate
bargaining units.
c. Department heads
There are employed at certain canneries persons whom the FTA-CIO designates
as department heads but who, the record shows, can be more accurately described,
in occupational terms, as lead men or gang bosses. The employment of such
persons depends largely upon the size of the cannery operation. It is clear that
these employees are merely working leaders who do not possess the degree of
supervisory authority contemplated in the Board's usual definition of supervisory
employees. Three classifications of such employees-head lye wash, head butcher,
and head warehouseman-are listed in the sections fixing wages in the non-
resident and most of the resident contracts in the industry In addition to these
three, it appears that at some of the large canneries other working leaders
possessing the same degree of authority are employed According to the repre-
sentative of the FTA-CIO, some canneries employ "head slimers", "head linemen",
and possibly other lead men. All parties agree that all employees who perform
the work mentioned above are properly included in the appropriate unit or units
However; the ASI takes the position that it recognizes no job classifications of
so-called department heads other than the three named in the contracts and
objects to the specification by name of additional classifications in the definition
of the bargaining unit on the ground, in substance, that this would create new
classifications of employees which the unions would demand "be included in the
list of employees who shall be put to work " The contention of the ASI poses
an issue which is properly a subject of collective bargaining, rather than an issue
to be determined in deciding the composition of the appropriate unit or units.
The undersigned, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, will recommend
that department heads (lead men) be included within the units."
d. Cannery worker timekeepers
At large canneries there generally is employed a person who is appointed to
maintain employee time records. He is termed the "company timekeeper" and,
in accordance with the agreement of the parties, it will be recommended that he
be excluded from the units At certain canneries, there is also employed a person
who is appointed by the employees or their bargaining representative to check
the accuracy of the records of the company timekeeper. This employee is termed
by the FTA-CIO as the "cannery worker timekeeper." Although the non-
resident contracts contain no reference to this classification, it appears that
certain Companies requisition from the FTA-CIO employees who devote all or a
part of their time to such work. The position of the parties respecting the
inclusion of cannery worker timekeepers is the same as that respecting the
so-called department heads (lead men) other than the three named in the con-
tracts In accordance with his determination of the latter issue, the undersigned
will recommend that cannery worker timekeepers be included within the units.
""As indicated above , this classification of the employees concerned is used as a con-
venient description in defining the units whether new classifications of employees shall
be requisitioned from the contracting unions and new classifications shall be created for
th- purpose of fixing wages or other conditions of employment is not a matter for the
Board to decide.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1553
e. Cannery worker culinary help
Culinary workers are employed at canneries for the purpose of preparing and
serving meals to the cannery workers .117 All parties except the ANB agree that
cannery worker culinary help should be included within the units. The ANB
would exclude them on the grounds, in substance, that they are engaged almost
exclusively in preparing food for non-residents and that the residents among
the culinary help generally fraternize and live with the non-residents. Nearly
all collective contracts for cannery workers in the industry, including the con-
tract executed by the ANB and the ASI in 1944, include provisions governing
the employment of culinary help. The undersigned will recommend that cannery
worker culinary help be included within the units.
C. Concluding bindings
The undersigned finds that
(a) all (non-resident) cannery workers employed from the States of
California, Oregon, and Washington for Alaskan cannery operations by all
the Members listed in Appendix A ;
(b) all (non-resident) cannery workers employed from the States of Cali-
fornia, Oregon, and Washington for Alaskan cannery operations by each
of the Independents, listed in Appendix A ;
(c) all resident cannery workers employed by all the Members in the
Bristol Bay District listed in Appendix A;
(d) all resident cannery workers employed by all the Members in the
Peninsula District listed in Appendix A ;
(e) all resident cannery workers employed by all the Members in the
Southeastern District ... listed in Appendix A ;
(f) all resident cannery workers employed by each of the Independents
in the Bristol Bay District listed in Appendix A ;
(g) all resident cannery workers employed by each of the Independents
in the Peninsula District listed in Appendix A; and
(h) All resident cannery workers employed by each of the independents
in the Southeastern District listed in Appendix A.109
in shore plants and floating canneries working at the canning, processing, and
handling of fish from the time the fish are run on the conveyor to the fish bin,
and the several operations until the finished product is canned, labeled, and
packed in cartons or cases and delivered to the warehouses or vessels (this
includes the making of cans, boxes and cartons, operation and feeding of the
following machines, but not the installation, upkeep or maintenance : iron chinks,
gang knives, butchers or cutters, filling machine [feeders and helpers], clinchers,
reformers, slitters, can body machines, pasting machines, casing machines, stitch-
ing machines, and all work that has been done customarily heretofore which does
not conflict with any work heretofore performed by the Machinists' Union 110)
,
107 There are also culinary workers who prepare and serve meals for persons who work
on floating equipment and for machinists , carpenters , bookkeepers , executive personnel and
others who eat in a mess house separate from that provided the cannery workers. These
culinary workers are not involved in this proceeding.
108 Yakutat is included within the Southeastern District . See footnote 91, supra.
100 The undersigned has made no conclusionary findings respecting the appropriate units
of resident cannery workers in the Cook Inlet, Kodiak -Afognak, and Copper River and
Prince William Sound Districts since , as found in Section III, above, no questions of
representation have arisen concerning such employees.
110 See footnote 95, supra.
1554 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
including cannery worker foremen, second foremen, utility men, department
heads (leadmen), cannery worker timekeepers, cannery worker cooks, bakers,
bull cooks and culinary help, but excluding machinists, carpenters, radio opera-
tors, office employees, doctors and nurses, winter watchmen, night watchmen,
superintendents, assistant superintendents, cannery foremen, and company
timekeepers and/or bookkeepers, constitute, respectively, separate units appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9
(b) of the Act"'
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
Each of the petitioning labor organizations and the ASI request that the Board
resolve the questions of representation which have arisen in the industry during
the coming season. The SIU-AFL, in urging the dismissal of all petitions, ad-
verts to the present unsettled condition of the industry resulting from the war
and the Concentration Program. Regarding the SIU-AFL's contention that the
absence of former employees of the Companies who are now in the Armed Forces
of the United States would deprive any election of its representative character,
it is sufficient to point out that the Board has considered and rejected similar
contentions in other cases.12 On the entire record, the undersigned is not con-
vinced that the wartime decline in the number of cannery workers, or the changes
in the organization and operation of the industry required by the Concentration
Program, is sufficient to justify the Board in withholding its determination of
the.issues presented in these proceedings. The undersigned will recommend that
the questions of representation which have arisen within the units found
appropriate in Section IV, supra, be resolved by elections by secret ballot.
A. Eligibility to vote
With respect to an election involving non-resident cannery workers, the FTA-
CIO urges that all such persons who were on the pay roll of any Company for
more than 15 days during the canning season in any one of the years from 1942
to 1945, inclusive, should be eligible to vote. The SIU-AFL contends that all
non-resident cannery workers employed by any Company for any period of time
during the 1945 canning season should be eligible to vote. The ASI suggests
that all such workers employed for a total of 15 days or more in the 1944 and
1945 canning seasons, or in either, should be permitted to participate in the
elections.
With respect to resident cannery workers, the FTA-CIO urges the adoption of
standards of eligibility identical with those suggested by it for non-resident em-
ployees. The SIU-AFL contends that all. residents employed by Companies in-
volved in the elections at any time during the 1944 canning season should be per-
mitted to cast ballots ; while the ANB would permit resident cannery workers to
vote if they had been employed at any one of the twenty-two canneries involved
in its petitions at any time between April 1 and October 1 of the years 1944 and
1945. The IFAWA-CIO would extend the franchise to all resident workers
employed during the canning seasons of 1944 or 1945, subject to the following
qualifications: (1) Persons who worked in 1944 should be entitled to vote if
they were employed for a total of 8 days or more in that year; (2) residents who
11 There is set forth in Appendix C, attached hereto, a more comprehensive list of the
classifications of cannery workers who are included in or excluded from the appropriate
units . The purpose of this list is to make more definite the classifications set forth above
by including classifications subsumed by the classifications in the text . This list, however,
does not necessarily contain all such sub-classifications used in the industry.
112 E g, Matter of Mine Safety Appliance Cc , etc, 55 N. L. It. B. 1190.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1 1555
did not have 8 days of employment in 1944 should be entitled to vote only if they
have been employed for a total of 8 days or more in the 1945 season, but (3) resi-
dents who did not have 8 days of employment in 1944 should not be required to
meet any minimum standard with respect to employment in 1945, if elections
in the particular district begin prior to the fifteenth day of the canning season.
The ASI suggests that the eligibility of resident cannery workers to vote in any
election or elections be established by the same standards as it had previously
suggested with respect to non-resident workers.
In support of its position, the FTA-CIO points to the increased turnover
among the employees because of the war, and the reduced employment oppor-
tunities for both residents and non-residents as a result of the Concentration
Program The FTA-CIO states that the large number of persons who were
formerly employed in the industry from season to season, and who expect to re-
turn to it after the war, would be denied an opportunity to vote if eligibility is
restricted to the warkers,employed by the Companies in the current season. There
is merit in the desire of the FTA-CIO to define the franchise in a manner which
will permit balloting by the greatest possible number of persons customarily
employed in the industry. However, no convincing reason has been advanced
to support the proposition that the use of pay rolls for the past 4 years is neces-
sary to accomplish this objective. Such a requirement would present adminis-
trative difficulties which might conceivably jeopardize the holding of elections
during the current season Upon the entire record, the undersigned is satisfied
that use of the resident and non-resident pay rolls for the 1944 and 1945 seasons,
with the qualifications set forth below, will afford a representative basis for the
determination of eligibility to vote.
B. The Companies involved
The salmon canning industry in Alaska has long been characterized by a rela-
tively high degree of turnover among the business enterprises engaged in this
industry. Changes in the industry from year to year have taken such forms as
outright sales of cannery properties by one Company to another, lease arrange-
ments, the organization or dissolution of partnerships and joint ventures, the
transformation of corporations into partnerships or sole proprietorships and
vice versa, and the temporary closing or abandonment of canneries for financial
or other reasons. This tendency* among the Companies has not been arrested
by the Concentration Program. While the record indicates the belief of all in-
formed parties that 1945 operations will be conducted, in the main, by the same
Companies which were actively interested in salmon canning in 1944, the pros-
pect of changes of the type outlined above during the pendency of these pro-
ceedings and prior to the conduct of an election or elections, is a possibility which
should not be ignored.
In view of this possibility, and its probable unsettling effect upon the dis-
position of these' matters by the Board, the undersigned will recommend that
the Board's Direction of Elections provide for such contingencies. Specifically,
it will be recommended that each election be directed among the employees of
the Companies involved and their successors, or assigns, if any. Subject to
this qualification, the Companies whose employees will be involved in the
elections necessary to resolve the questions of representation respecting the non-
resident cannery workers will be the Members and each of the Independents
who employ non-resident cannery workers. With respect to resident cannery
workers, elections will be necessary to resolve the questions of representation
1556 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
affecting such employees of the Members and each of the Independents in the
Bristol Bay, Peninsula, and Southeastern Districts.
C. The labor organizations involved
International Fishermen and Allied Workers of America, CIO, has requested
that its name be placed upon the ballot in any election ordered for resident
cannery workers in Bristol Bay."' It wishes to be identified on the ballot as
"IFAWA, affiliated with the C. I. 0."
Food, Tobacco, Agricultural, and Allied Workers Union, of America, CIO, has
requested that its name be placed upon the ballot in any elections ordered for
non-resident or resident cannery workers. It desires to be identified on the ballot
in all elections as "FTA-CIO".
Grand Camp of Alaska Native Brotherhood has requested that its name be
placed upon the ballot is any election ordered for resident cannery workers in
Southeastern Alaska. This organization wishes to be identified as "ANB-ANS" 16
113 The Companies whose employees will be involved in each of the elections are identified
ir,Appendix A.
114 Since the undersigned does not recommend the holding of elections among resident
cannery workers in certain districts, it is unnecessary to consider the IFAWA-CIO's
request to be placed upon the ballot in any elections conducted therein.
1e In support of its motion to dismiss the petitions of the ANB, the FTA-CIO asserts
that this organization is incapable of acting as the statutory representative of the
employees involved because its constitution and bylaws restrict eligibility for full member-
ship to persons of aboriginal descent and disqualify associate members from holding office
in the Grand Camp of the ANB. (Compare Tunstall v Brotherhood of Locomotive
Firemen and Enginemen, 65 Sup. Ct. 235.)
Prior to 1944, the Constitution of the ANB provided that eligibility for full membership
would be restricted to "descendants of the aboriginal races of North America," and that
"Persons not eligible to active membership . . . may become associate members upon
receiving the unanimous vote of a subordinate camp . . Upon election, such a person
shall have all the privileges of an active member except that of holding office." Prior to
1939. It appears that associate memberships were normally granted only to persons who
had married native residents of Alaska.
In 1944 the Constitution was amended to, read as follows .
ARTICLE II Eligibility Those eligible for full membership shall be the descendants
of the aboriginal races of North America . . .
ARTICLE XII Honorary and Associate Membership SEC 1. Persons not eligible to
full membership under Article II, may become associate members upon receiving the
unanimous vote of a subordinate camp . . . Upon election, such persons shall have
all the privileges of a full member in the collective bargaining agency
At the Convention, an amendment to the Constitution of the subordinate camps was
also adopted , as follows :
SEC 14 A local camp may appoint one or more bargaining Agency Committees,
whose chairman shall be the delegate or business [agent] It shall be the duty of this
committee, and especially of its chairman, to secure the enforcement of any labor
contract in the area for which lie is elected . . .
The uncontradicted testimony of witnesses for the ANB establishes, that this organiza-
tion, from 1939 to the present, has admitted residents of Alaska to associate membership
in the ANB and to full membership in its Collective Bargaining Agencies described
heretofore, without discrimination as to their racial origin. It further appears that non-
native members of Collective Bargaining Agencies have, upon occasion, been elected to
office within the local group of which they are a part. , There is no evidence that the ANB
or any Collective Bargaining Agency of the ANB has negotiated an agreement with any
Company which discriminated against non-members, or non-native members, of the
Collective Bargaining Agency regarding the terms and conditions of their employment.
Nor Is there any evidence to indicate that the ANB has otherwise discriminated in its
bargaining activities While local committees are primarily responsible for contract
negotiations on behalf of each Collective Bargaining Agency, the Grand Secretary of the
ANB is also charged with the responsibility for promoting collective bargaining and
assisting local groups in the conduct of negotiations, subject to the orders of the Executive
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1557
Seafarers International Union of North America, AFL, acting on behalf of
its affiliates, has requested that its name be placed upon the ballot in any elec-
tions ordered for non-resident cannery workers throughout the Territory, and
for resident cannery workers in Southeastern Alaska 118 It wishes to be identified
on the ballot in all elections as "Seafarers, A. F. of L."
The undersigned will recommend that these requests be granted.
D. Conclusion
The undersigned will recommend that the questions concerning representation
which have arisen be resolved by elections by secret ballot among the employees
within the appropriate units who have worked a total of 15 or more days in the
1944 and 1945 canning seasons,' or either season, for one or more of the Com-
panies listed in Appendix A or their successors and assigns within the scope of one
or more of the appropriate units (provided that if any of said employees has
been employed by more than one of such Companies, he shall vote as the
employee of the Company by whom he was last employed), subject to the limita-
tions and additions set forth in the Direction."'
RECOMMENDATIONS
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in
the case, the undersigned recommends that the National Labor Relations Board :
1. Adopt the findings and Recommended Decision herein.
Committee. The FTA-CIO contends, in essence , that the constitutional provisions which
operate to bar non-natives from these "policy-making offices" are discrimihatory per ae,
and that the ANB is therefore incapable of providing representation to all employees
"fairly, impartially, and in good faith." `
In the light of the foregoing evidence, the undersigned is of the opinion that these
constitutional provisions, standing alone, are not sufficient to support a finding that the
ANB is incapable of acting as a statutory representative.
116 See footnote 114, supra.
117 There was much discussion at the hearing regarding the time and place at which
elections should be held. With respect to the non-residents, the FTA-CIO urged that the
elections be held prior to the 1945 canning season at the port or ports of embarkation,
while the ASI contended that the elections could best be conducted after the season at the
port or ports of debarkation
With respect to the resident cannery workers, all parties agree that the elections should
be conducted at the canneries, with the qualification that it might be possible to establish
one polling place for several canneries in various centers of population, such as Ketchikan.
The IFAWA-CIO suggests that polling in Bristol Bay should begin as early as possible after
the start of the season ; all other parties urged that the elections begin after the fifteenth
day of the cannning season, when employment is most likely to be at its seasonal peak.
Several of the parties expressed concern over the possibility that an arbitrary or in-
flexible formula for the determination of eligibility to vote might disenfranchise workers
who may not have begun work in the 1945 season by the time the election is being con-
ducted at a particular cannery.
Since these problems are primarily administrative, and are concerned with the mechanics
of the election, the undersigned recommends that their determination be left to the
Regional Director in the light of all the relevant circumstances at the time the elections
are being conducted In this connection, however, it is noted that the problem of eligibility
presented by workers who, may not be employed on the date of the elections is partially
met by the undersigned 's recommendation that 1944 employment for the required number
of days be considered qualifying. If the date of the election at any particular cannery
finds any residents unable to qualify on the basis of combined employment experience
in the 1944 and 1945 seasons, or on the basis of 1945 employment alone, it has been
suggested that the ballots of such persons be impounded and counted only if their subse-
quent employment in the balance of the 1945 season serves to satisfy the terms of the
eligibility formula set forth above In the opinion,of the undersigned, this suggestion
will meet the problem under consideration, and it is recommended that this procedure be
followed.
1558 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. Issue a Direction of Elections as follows :
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations
Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to
Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-
Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DiREcTED that , as part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Companies listed in Appendix A or
their successors and assigns , separate elections by secret ballot shall be conducted
as early as possible , but not later than one hundred fifty ( 150) days from the
date of this Direction , under the direction and supervision of the Regional
Director for the Nineteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National
Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III , Sections 10 and 11 , of said
Rules and Regulations , among the employees within the units found appropriate
in Section IV, C, above , who have worked a total of 15 or more days in the
1944 and 1945 canning seasons , or either season, for one or more of the Com-
panies listed in Appendix A or their successors and assigns within the scope
of one or more of the appropriate units ( provided that if any of said employees
has been employed - by more than one of such Companies , lie shall vote as the
employee of the Company by whom he was last employed ), including employees
who did not work during the said pay-roll period because they were ill or on
vacation or temporarily laid off, and including employees in the armed forces of
the United States who present themselves in person at the polls , but excluding
those employees who have quit or been discharged for cause and have not been
rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the elections , ( 1) to determine whether
the employees described in groups ( a) and ( b) of Section IV C desire to be
represented by the FTA-CIO or by the Seafarers , AFL, for the purposes of
collective bargaining, or by neither; ( 2) to determine whether the employees
described in groups (c) and ( f) of Section IV C desire to be represented by the
FTA-CIO or by the IFAWA , affiliated with the CIO , for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining , or by neither ; ( 3) to determine whether or not the employees
described in groups ( d) and ( g) of Section IV 0 desire to be represented by the
FTA-CIO for the purposes of collective bargaining ; and (4 ) to determine whether
the employees described in groups ( e) and ( h) of Section IV C desire to be
represented by the PTA -CIO, by the ANB-ANS, or by the Seafarers , AFL, for
the purposes of collective bargaining , or by none of said organizations
3. Dismiss the petition of the FTA -CIO insofar as it relates to resident cannery
workers in the Kodiak -Afognak , Cook Inlet , and Copper River and Prince William
Sound Districts.
Any party may, within twenty -five (25 ) days from the date of this Recom-
mended Decision and Recommended Direction of Elections , file with the Board,
Rochambeau Building , Washington, D. C., an original and three copies of a
brief . Immediately upon such filing, the party filing the same shall serve a copy
thereof upon each of the other parties. Should any party desire permission to
argue orally before the Board, request therefor must be made within fifteen (15)
days . from the date of this Recommended Decision and Recommended Direction
of Elections.
RoBERT F . Ko xrz,
Trial Examiner.
Dated April 6, 1945.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC.
APPENDIX A
The Companies involved
Companies
1. SOUTHEASTERN DISTRICT
MEMBERS
Major A W. Brindle and H. A. Brindle d/b/a Ward's
Cove Packing Co
Balcom-Payne Fisheries ------------------------------ r____
P. E. Harris & Cc---------------------------- =------------
G. E. Paup, S. 0 Paup, M. J Heneghan, James Schick-
ban, John X. Johnson. and Hugh Sawyer d/b'a Beegle
Packing Company
New England Fish Co____________________________________
Libby, McNeill & Libby__________________________________
Fidalgo Island Packing Co................................
Nakat Packing Corporation_______________________________
Annette Island Canning Co_______________________________
Pacific American Fisheries, Ine____________________________
Whiz Packing Company__________________________________
Ketchikan Packing Co____________________________________
W. Oxenburg and S. Oxenburg d/b/a Independent Salmon
Canneries 2
A. R. B. Packing Co 3-------------------------------------Farwest Alaska Company 3________________________________
Burnett Inlet Salmon Co 3_________________________________
Bellingham Canning Co...................................
Pyramid Fisheries Co , Inc................................
San Juan Fishing and Packing go. and Nick Bez, d/b/a
Todd Packing Company 4
August Buschman, H A. Fleager and A P. Wolf d/b/a
Hood Bay Salmon Co.
Superior Packing Co......................................
Douglas Fisheries, Inc_____________________________________
Sebastian-Stuart Fish Co..................................
Dean C. Kayler-------------------------------------------
Cape Cross Salmon Co____________________________________
Icy Straits Salmon Co-------------------------------------
Astoria & Puget Sound Canning Co_______________________
Haines Packing Company_________________________________
INDEPENDENTS
Northern Packing Company 6________________________
Hydaburg Cooperative Assn.7..............................
Peratrovich & Son Packing Company 6___________________
Craig Packing Company 6__-- ----------- ---------------
Salt Sea Fisheries__________________________________________
Oscar Nicholson
Juneau Packing Company 6_________ -----------
Grindall Fisheries, Inc 2___________________________________
II. COPPER RIPER AND PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND
DISTRICT
MEMBERS
Form of organiza-
tion
Partnership-______
Corporation-------
Corporation -------
Partnership---____
Corporation-------
Corporation --_ _ _ _ _
Corporation-------
Corporation ---_ -_ -
Corporation-------
Corporation ---_ -_ _
Corporation---_--_
Corporation-------
Partnership -------
Corporation ---_ _ _ -
Corporation-------
Corporation -------
Corporation-------
Corporation ---_ _ - -
Joint venture -_____
Partnership-------
Corporation-------
Corporation-------
Corporation-------
Individual --------
Corporation ---_ _ _ -
Corporation-------
Corporation -------
Corporation -------
--------------------
Cooperative------'-
Partnership-______
--------------------
idual ........Indiv
--------------------
--------------------
Canneries I
Ward's Cove.
Ketchikan.
Hawk Inlet; Rose Inlet;
Sunny Point; Kake.
Ketchikan.
Chatham, Noyes Island,
Ketchikan.
Yakutat, Taku; Craig,
George Inlet.
Pillar Bay; Ketchikan.
Hidden Inlet; Union
Bay; Waterfall.
Metlakatla.
Petersburg, Kasaan
Ketchikan.
Ketchikan.
Ketchikan.
Wrangell.
Wrangell.
Saginaw Bay;
Inlet.
Klawock.
Sitka.
Todd.
Hood Bay.
Tenakee
Douglas.
Tyee.
Scow Bay 6
Pelican City.
Hoonah.
Excursion Inlet.
Letnikof Cove
Ketchikan
Hydaburg
Klawock.
Craig.
Tenakee.
Petersburg
Idaho Inlet
Elfin Cove.
Burnett
New England Fish Co_____________________________________ Corporation------- Cordova.
G. P. Halferty & Co_______________________________________ Corporation--_____ Cordova
W. R. Gilbert Co Inc_____________________________________ Corporation------- Whitshed.
Copper River Packing Company__________________________ Corporation------- Nellie Juan
I Certain of these canneries did not operate in 1944, having been closed under the terms of the Concer.-
tration Program.
2 Ceased doing business in Alaska in 1944.
3 Participant in a joint venture, d/b/a Farwest Wrangell Company.
4 Also known as Peril Strait Packing Company.
6 Alaska Glacier Sea Foods Company joined in the operation of this cannery in 1944.
6 The record indicates that this Company may have ceased salmon canning operations in Alaska.
7 An Indian Cooperative Association, chartered under Federal statute.
8 Exact names of partners unknown
9 Possibly a subsidiary of the Burnett Inlet Salmon Company.
1560 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX A-Continued
Companies Form of organiza-
tion Canneries I
H. COPPER RIVER AND PRINCE WILLIAM SOUND
DISTRICT-Continued
MEMBERS-continued
Ellamar Packing Co Inc__________________________________ Corporation ------- Ellamar
San Juan Fishing & Packing Co_________________---------__ Corporation ------- San Juan
A W Wittig and G B Cedarholm d/b/a Port Ashton Partnership-__-___ Port Ashton
Packing Co
INDEPENDENTS
Copper River Cooperative Company---------------------- -------------------- Copper River
Crystal Falls Fish Company------------------------------ -------------------- Mountain Slough
Shephard Point Packing Cc_______________________________ -------------------- Shephard Pt
I)ayville Packing Company------------------------------- -------------------- Valdez
Pioneer Sea Foods 10_____________________________ -------------------- Cordova
Hagen and Company-------------------------------------- -------------------- Seward.
HL COOK INLET DISTRICT
MEMBERS
Libby, McNeill & Libby __________________-__-__------__ Corporation------- Kenai.
H V Emard, and Loretta Emard d/b/a Emard Packing Partnership ------- Anchorage
Co
General Fish Co----------------------------------------- Corporation ------ Anchorage.
Kodiak Island Fishing, Trading & Packing Cc ------------ Corporation ---_--_ Seldovia.
Cook Inlet Packing Co------------------------------------ Corporation----_ _- Seldovia.
Fidalgo Island Packing Cc--------------------------------
-
Corporation_---__- Port Graham.
J Fribrock, Joseph R Fribrock, and Iris M Fribrock,E Partnership----_-- Snug Harbor.
d/b/a Snug Harbor Packing Co.
Alaska Year Round Canneries_____________________________ Corporation--___-_ Seldovia.
INDEPENDENTS
Homer Spit Packing Company____________________________ -------------------- Homer.
Port Chatham Packing Cc____________________ -------------------- Portlock.
Nikisbka Packing Company 11____________ -------------------- Boulder Point.Trading Bay Packers 12------------------------------------
-------------------- Cook Inlet.
Mitchell and Keck __--_-_ ---------------------- -------------------- McKenzie Pt.
Polar Sea Foods Company________________________________ -------------------- Ninilchik.
IV. KODIAK-AFOGNAK DISTRICT
MEMBERS
Pacific American Fisheries, Inc ---------------------------- Corporation------- Alitak.
Far North Packing Co------------------------------------ Corporation --_ _ _ _ _ Moser Bay.
San Juan Fishing and Packing Co------------------------- Corporation------- Uganik
Alaska Packers Association-------------------------------- Corporation -_- _ _ _ _ Larsen Bay.
Uganik Fisheries, Inc------------------------ --- Corporation------- Uganik.
Kodiak Fisheries Company_________________ ---- Corporation ---- _ _ _ Port Bailey; Shearwater.
Frank McConaghy Cc ------------------------------------ Corporation------- Kodiak
Washington Fish & Oyster Co Inc------------------------ Corporation ---_ _ _ _ Port William.
Grimes Packing Co__-_---___-____________________________ Individual - - _ _ - _ _ - Ouzinkie.
Alaska Red Salmon Packers,Inc -------------------------- Corporation-___-__ Carmel.
INDEPENDENTS
Sandvik Hand Cannery----------------------------------- -------------------- Uganik.
Parks Canning Company 13--___________________________ Partnership------- Uyak Bay.
V. PENINSULA DISTRICT
MEMBERS
Alaska Packers Association________________________________ Corporation------- Chignik.
Robert B Sebastian, C J. Sebastian, Joseph Jones and Partnership------- Chignik.
William Jones d/b/a Chignik Salmon Co.
I Certain of these canneries did not operate in 1944, having been closed under the terms of the Concen-
tration Program
10 Now merged with Western Fisheries, Inc
11 Now known as F E Seator Packing Company.
12 Formerly identified as Reilly and Wilman's Cannery.
13 Exact names of partners unknown.
ALASI{A SALMON INDUSTRY, INC.
APPENDIX A-Continued
Companies
Form of organiza-
tion
1561
Canneries I
V. PENINSULA DiSTmcT-Continued
MEMBERS-continued
Pacific American Fisheries, Inc-_ -------------- Corporation------- Squaw Harbor; King
Cove, Port Moller
Alaska Pacific Salmon Company-------------------------- Corporation --_ _ - _ - Sand Point.
P. E. Harris & Co----------------------------------------- Corporation------- False Pass.
I awrence Calvert, Starr Calvert, William Calvert, and Partnership ------- Port Moller.
Nick Bea d/h/a Peninsula Packing Co.
INDEPENDENT
Alaska Native Consolidated Canning Co------------------ Sand Point.
VI BRISTOL BAY DISTRICT
MEMBERS
Alaska Packers Association-------------------------------- Corporation ------- Clark Point (E), Uga-
shik, Egegik, Naknek
(NN), Naknek (M),
Koggiung (U), Coffee
Creek (X)
Pacific American Fisheries, Inc---------------------------- Corporation------- Naknek, Nornek, Snag
Point
Libby, McNeill & Libby---------------------------------- Corporation ------- Ekuk, Egegik, Koggi-
ung, Libbyville (2)
Alaska Salmon Company---------------------------------- Corporation------- Wood River, Peterson
Point (2)
Red Salmon Canning Co---------------------------------- Corporation-----_- Naknek.
Nakat Packing Corporation------------------------------- Corporation------- Nakeen.
Intercoastal Packing Co----------------------------------- Corporation ------- Kvichak
Columbia River Packers Association---------------------- Corporation ------- Combine Creek, Nak-
nek
Lemuel C Wingard, Mary Lou Wingard, and Charles Partnership ------- Ugashik
Coffey, d/b/a Wingard Packing Co.
I Certain of these canneries did not operate in 1944, having'been closed under the terms of the Concen-
tration Program
APPENDIX B
Evidence of representation
Approxi- Designations
mate Contract ao e ----number of c v r ge -
employees i Non-resident Resident
District
Non- Resi- _resi-
dent Non-resident Resident CIO SIU IFAWA-CIO FTA-CIO SIU AMBdent
1. Bristol Bay ------- 887 934 FTA-CIO exclu- Joint contract bet- (2) ___ '_____________" 872 members 431 permit holders ------------------
sive contract ween ASI and in 1944. in 1942.
with ASI. IFAWA-CIO and
FTA-CIO
H. Peninsula -------- 351 160 FTA-CIO exclu- FTA-CIO exclusive (2) __________________ _______________ 26 members in ------------------sive contract contract with P. E. 1944 at Alaska
with ASI. Harris & Co. (False Packers Ass'n
Pass). (Chignik) .
III. Kodiak-Afognak- 432 155 (1) FTA-CIO ex- SlUcontractswithall (2) 70 members at _______________ ____________________ 101 members at
clusive contract canneries operating 4 canneries in 5 canneries in
with ASI (2) in 1944. 1944. 1944
SIU exclusive
contracts with 4
canneries.2
IV. Cook Inlet ------- 85 331 FTA-CIO exclu- IFAWA-CIO exclu- (1) __________________ (4) ----------- -------------------- ------------------sive contract sive contracts with
with ASI. 2 canneries in 1944.
V. Copper River and 355 191 FTA-CIO exclu- IFAWA-CIO exclu- (a) ------------------ (4)___________ _
William sive contract sive contracts with
Sound. with ASI. 10 canneries in 1944
VI. Southeastern 5 1,466 1, 802 (1) FTA-CIO ex- Separate members- (_) 140 members at _______________ 513 members at 19 453 members at 1,324 members?
clusive contract only contracts be- 8 canneries in out of 36 can- 20 out of 36 at 21 out of 36
with ASI (2) tweenASi and FTA- 1944 nerles operating canneries op- canneries op-
SIU exclusive CIO, SIU-AFL and in 1944. erating in crating in 1944.
contracts with ANB 1944.
12 canneries . 6
Total- --------- 3,676 3,553 - -------------------- ------------------------ 23,200 210------------ 872----------- 970---------------- 585--- 1,324.
I The figures shown are derived in part from estimates of manpower requirements
furnished by the Companies to the Deputy Coordinator of Fisheries, and in part from
other estimated figures provided at the bearing.
2 The total number of non-resident cannery workers dispatched by the FTA-CIO in
1944 was estimated as approximately 3,200 The record does not disclose the number
employed in each district
3 These are the canneries of Frank McConaghy Co at Kodiak, Washington Fish and
Oyster Co at Port William, Grimes Packing Company at Ouzinkie, and Alaska Red
Salmon Packers at Carmel.
4 The number of members employed at canneries covered by IFAWA-CIO contracts in
1944 is not disclosed by the record
a Yakutat is included herein.
These are the canneries of Hydaburg Cooperative Association at Hydaburg; Peratro-
vich & Son Packing Co at Klawock, Bellingham Canning Co. at Klawock; Burnett Inlet
Salmon Co. at Saginaw Bay, Dean C. Kaylor at Scow Bay, Burnett Inlet Salmon Co.
(Grindall Fisheries, Inc.) at Elfin Cove, Annette Island Canning Co. at Metlakatla;
Ketchikan Packing Co at Ketchikan, Northern Packing Company at Ketchikan,
Independent Salmon Canneries at Ketchikan, Douglas Fisheries, Inc. at Douglas,
Alaska Glacier Seafoods Company at Petersburg, and Farwest Alaska Company at
Wrangell.
7 The figure shown is derived from an affidavit of William L. Paul, Jr , Grand Secietary
of the ANB, setting forth the number of that organization's members employed at various
canneries, without specification as to whether such persons held membership in an ANB
collective bargaining agency, or merely he'd a general membership in the ANB. See
discussion in Sections IV and V of this Recommended Decision.
1564 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX C
COMPOSITION OF THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The appropriate units, as defined in Section IV of this Recommended Decision,
are deemed to include the following classes of employees :
Cannery Worker Foremen Can Tester
Second Foremen Casing Machine Operator
Head Butcher Catching cans on line by hand
Head Lye Wash Slimers
Head Warehousemen Gang Knives
Head Lineman Filler Feeders
Head Slimer Operator of Cooler Loaders
Iron Chink Feeders Retort and Lye Wash men
Hand Butcher Men regularly supplying coolers to line
Hand Peughing Labeling machine operator
First Cook Wooden box maker and railer
Second Cook Box Pilers
Baker Solderers and Tin Cutters
Kitchen Help Jitney drivers in the Cannery
Waiters Slitter
Dishwashers Relief Man
Bull Cook Fish Chopper
Utility Men
Class B
Cannery Worker Timekeepers
Patching Table
Class A Reform Feeder
Scow Men. ( Slimer ) Clincher , Vacuum Machine,
Sorters and Salter Man
Fish House bins Warehouse Crew
Elevator in Fish House Catching and Piling empty
Filler Hopper men cans and empty boxes
Hand Labeling Crew General Can Loft work
Men wiring and stitching boxes other General Cannery work
Fish Inspector Janitor
The appropriate units as defined in Section IV are deemed to exclude:
Superintendent Machinists
Assistant Superintendent Carpenters
Company Bookkeeper Doctors
Company Timekeeper Nurses
Radio Operator Winter Watchmen
Office Employees Night Watchmen
Cannery Foreman
APPENDIX D
GLOSSARY OF AHBREvIATIONS
Employers:
CSI-Canned Salmon Industry ; a committee which acted in labor relations
matters for salmon cannery operators affiliated with the Association of
Pacific Fisheries , 1936-1939.
ASI-Alaska Salmon Industry , Inc.: a membership or non-profit corporation
which has acted in labor relations matters for its members , 1940-1945.
Members-Salmon cannery operators who maintain membership in Alaska
Salmon Industry, Inc.
ALASKA SALMON INDUSTRY, INC. 1565
Independents-Salmon cannery operators who do not maintain membership
in Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc.
Companies-A collective designation used herein when referring to salmon
cannery operators in the Territory of Alaska without regard to their status
as Members or Independents.
Labor Organizations:
Local 18257-Cannery Workers and Farm Laborers Union, Local 18257,
AFL; a federal union with headquarters at Seattle, Washington, and sub-
locals at Portland, Oregon, and Ketchikan, Alaska, which admitted to
membership non-resident and resident employees of the Companies, 1933-
1937. Its federal charter, surrendered in 1937, was reissued in 1938 to
a successor organization by the AFL.
Local 20454-Alaska Cannery Workers Union, Local 20454, AFL ; a federal
union with headquarters at Seattle, Washington, which admitted to
membership non-resident employees of Japanese origin, 1937-1938.
Local 20195-Alaska Cannery Workers Union, Local 20195, AFL ; a federal
union with headquarters at San Francisco, California, which admitted to
membership non-resident employees of the Companies, 1933-1937.
UCAPAWA-CIO-United Cannery, Agricultural, Packing, and Allied Work-
ers of America, affiliated with the CIO ; an organization which admits to
membership non-resident and resident employees of the Campanies. By
action of its 1944 Convention, the organization changed its name to
FTA-CIO-Food, Tobacco, Agricultural and Allied Workers Union of Amer-
ica, affiliated with the CIO.
Amalgamated Local 7-Cannery Workers and Farm Laborers Union,
Amalgamated Local 7: a local union with headquarters at Seattle,
Washington, which admits to membership non-resident employees of
the Companies, without distinction as to their port of embarkation for
Alaska. Prior to 1944, its jurisdiction had been confined to non-
resident workers embarking for Alaska from the ports of Seattle and
Bellingham.
Local 5-Alaska Cannery Workers Union, Local 5: a local union with
headquarters at San Francisco, California, which had admitted to
membership non-resident employees of the Companies who embarked
for Alaska at that port, 1938-1943. It is now consolidated with
Amalgamated Local 7.
Local 226-Northwest Alaska Cannery Workers Union, Local 226; a
local union with headquarters at Portland, Oregon, which had ad-
mitted to membership non-resident employees of the Companies who
embarked for Alaska at that port, 1938-1943. It is now consolidated
with Amalgamated Local 7.
Local 222-Frederick Sound Cannery Workers Union, Local 222; a
local union with headquarters at Petersburg, Alaska, which admits
to membership resident employees of Companies operating salmon
canneries in the vicinity of Petersburg.
Local 237-Southern Alaska Cannery Workers Union, Local 237; a
local union with headquarters at Ketchikan, Alaska, which admits
to membership resident employees of Companies operating salmon
canneries in the vicinity of Ketchikan.
Amalgamated Local 269-United Cannery Workers Union, Amalgamated
Local 269; a local union with headquarters at Juneau, Alaska, which
admits to membership resident employees of Companies operating
salmon canneries in the vicinity of Juneau In 1944, it was con-
63 9 67 8-45-vo l 61--100
1566 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
solidated with Icy Straits Cannery Workers Union, Local 263, at
Hoonah.
IFAWA-CIO-International Fishermen and Allied Workers of America,
affiliated with the CIO; an organization which admits to membership
fishermen and cannery workers.
AFU-CIO-Alaska Fishermen's Union; an affiliate of the IFAWA-CIO
which admits to membership resident and non-resident employees of
the Companies engaged in catching and transporting fish.
Local 10-Copper River and Prince William Sound Cannery Workers
Union, Local 10; a local union with headquarters at Cordova, Alaska,
which admits to membership resident employees of Companies oper-
ating salmon canneries in the Copper River and Prince William Sound
District.
Local 25-Local Cannery Union, No 25; a local union with headquarters
at Anchorage, Alaska, which admits to membership resident em-
ployees of Companies operating salmon canneries in the Cook Inlet
District
Local 46-Bristol Bay Cannery Workers Local No. 46, a local union with
headquarters at Dillingham, Alaska, which admits to membership resi-
dent employees of Companies operating salmon canneries in the Bristol
Bay District.
SIU-AFL-Seafarers International Union of North America, affiliated with
the AFL; an organization which admits to membership fishermen and
cannery workers
AFCWU-AFL-Alaska Fish Cannery Workers Union of the Pacific; an
affiliate of the SIU-AFL which admits to membership non-resident
employees of the Companies
ASPSU-AFL-Alaska Salmon Purse Seiners Union ; an affiliate of the
lIU-AFL, which admits to mcmberhip fishermen in the Southeastern
District. Its auxiliary, the Cannery Workers Auxiliary Union, admits
to membership resident employees of Companies operating salmon
canneries in the Southeastern District.
UFA-AFL-United Fishermen of Alaska ; an affiliate of the SIU-AFL,
which admits to membership fishermen in the Kodiak-Afognak Dis
trict. Its auxiliary, the United Cannery Workers of Kodiak Island,
admits to membership resident employees of Companies operating
salmon canneries in the Kodiak-Afognak District
Machinists-International Association of Machinists, affiliated with the
A-FL; an organization which admits to membership residents and non-
residents employed as machinists by the Companies
ANB-Grand Camp of Alaska Native Brotherhood ; an unaffiliated organiza-
tion which has chartered subordinate camps throughout the Southeastern
District -under its own auspices and those of its auxiliary, the Alaska
Native Sisterhood. These camps admit to membership resident employees
of Companies operating salmon canneries in the Southeastern District.