Columbia River Salmon and Tuna Packers Association, et al.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 2, 1950

91 N.L.R.B. 1424 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter Of COLUMBIA RIVER SALMON AND TUNA PACKERS Asso-
CIATION, ET AL.,1 EMPLOYERS and COLUMBIA RIVER CANNERY AND
ALLIED WORKERS LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION No. 1747, CIO',
PETITIONER
Cases Nos. 36-RC-498, 36-RC-500, 36-RC-501, 36-RC-5092, and
36-RC-503.-Decided November 2, 1950
DECISION AND ORDER
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Robert J.
Wiener, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-
member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles].
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds :
1. The Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees of
the Employers.
3. No question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employers within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act, for the following
reasons:
Columbia River Fishermen's Protective Union, the Intervenor
herein, has bargained with the Association since 1936 as the collective
bargaining representative of the employees involved in this proceed-
1 There are 15 Employers involved in this proceeding , the following 11 of whom are '
members of the Columbia River Salmon and Tuna Packers Association , herein called the As-
sociation ; Barbey Packing Company ; Bio Products , Oregon Ltd . ; San Juan Fish & Packing
Company ; Sebastian - Stuart Fish Company ; Point Adams Packing Company; Union Fish-
ermen's Cooperative Packing Company ; Columbia River Salmon Company, Inc. ; Del Mar
Canning Company ; New England Fish Company of Oregon ; Van Camp Sea Food Com-
pany, Inc. ; and Columbia -River Packers Association, Inc.
The following four nonmember Employers were served with notice of hearing but did
not appear at the hearing : Keystone Packing Company ; Seaside Clam Company ; Palace
Fish & Oyster Co.; and State Sea Food ( named in Cases Nos. 36-RC-500, 36-RC-501,
36-RC-502, and 36-RC-503, respectively). The record indicates, however, that these
Employers are signatories to the same contract as is the Association.
91 NLRB No. 222.
1424
COLUMBIA RIVER SALMON AND TUNA PACKERS ASS'N 1425
ing. Its current contract, as modified by a supplementary agreement
dated April 28, 1950, will not expire until March 31, 1951, and con-
tains a 30-day automatic renewal clause. The petition herein was
filed July 20, 1950. The Intervenor contends that this contract con-
stitutes a bar to the present proceeding. The Petitioner asserts,
however, that the contract cannot operate as a bar because (a) a schism
in the membership of the Intervenor crates a doubt concerning the
continued representation by the Intervenor of the employees involved
herein, and (b) the contract by its own terms is not effective because
Columbia River Fishermen's Protective Union has lost its majority
status. The Association takes no position on this issue.
During the latter part of 1949, International Fishermen and Allied
Workers of America, the Intervenor's International, herein called the
International, conducted a referendum throughout its membership on
the question of whether to affiliate with the International Longshore-
men and Warehousemen's Union, herein called the ILWU. The re-
sults of this referendum showed that although a majority of the mem-
bership of the Intervenor opposed the proposed amalgamation with
the ILWU, a majority of the entire International, on a Nation-wide
basis, favored such amalgamation. As a result, on May 25, 1950, the
executive board of the International announced the amalgamation
of the International with the ILWU. On June 7, 1950, at a regularly
scheduled meeting of the membership of the Intervenor, several mem-
bers led by Local Executive Board Member Stalcup, sought to obtain
a vote within the Intervenor on the question of disaffiliating from the
ILWU. However, the secretary-business agent of the Intervenor,
Henry Niemela, ruled the various motions out of order. Niemela
also declined to call a special meeting of the membership for the pur-
pose of voting on the question of disaffiliation.
Thereafter, on June 16, 1950, the Stalcup group secured a writ of
mandamus from the Circuit Court for the County of Clatsop, Oregon,
ordering Niemela to call a special meeting as requested by the Peti-
tioner. On June 22, 1950, pursuant to the Court's order the election
was held. However, prior to June 29, 1950, the date agreed upon by
the parties for the counting of the ballots, Niemela obtained an order
in the same Court vacating the writ of mandamus, and enjoining the
counting of the ballots. The ballots have never been counted.
On or about June 28, 1950, the Stalcup group met with representa-
tives of the CIO to discuss their desire to become affiliated with the
CIO, and on July 9, 1950, a membership meeting was held at which
temporary officers were elected and a charter was applied for from
the CIO who thereafter chartered the Petitioner.
1426 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On about July 1.8, 1950, the Petitioner met with representatives of
the Association, requested recognition as the collective bargaining
representative of its employees, and 2 days later filed its petition in
this proceeding. On August 29, 1950, by action of the executive board
of the CIO, the International and the ILWU were both expelled
from the CIO.
The Intervenor has continued to function, and the Association has
continued to recognize the Intervenor as the collective bargaining
representative of the employees involved. Although the Petitioner
has organized on a formal basis, the record shows that only 1 of the
18 officers of the Intervenor has become an officer of the Petitioner, and
there is no evidence that any of the others have become members of
the Petitioner.
In support of its first contention the Petitioner relies upon certain
cases in which we have found that a schism in the contracting union
has created such confusion in the bargaining relationship that the
contract no longer serves to promote industrial stability and thus
does not bar an immediate determination of representatives.' How-
ever, we do not regard those decisions as applicable in the circum-
stances of this case. We have required, as a minimum, in all such
cases that the members of the contracting union gathered at a meet-
ing held for such purpose, have expressed through a formal vote their
desire to take action affecting the existence or continued functioning
of the union concerned. In the instant case we find, at most, an
unsuccessful attempt on the part of a segment of the Intervenor's
members to obtain a formal vote to disaffiliate from the International,
and, failing this, a number of individual withdrawals and the crea-
tion of a new competing union. However, as stated above, the Inter-
venor has continued to function; it is capable of administering the
contract; and the Association continues to recognize the Intervenor
as the representative of the contract unit. Under these circumstances
we are unable to conclude that there exists such confusion in the bar-
gaining relationship as would warrant treating the contract as no
bar.3
To support its contention that the contract is no longer effective,
and hence not a bar, because of the loss of majority status by the
Intervenor, the Petitioner refers to Section 2, (b) of the contract which
provides : "This agreement shall be in effect in all plants of the under-
signed where the above named union has a majority of the employees
as members of the union," and relies upon evidence introduced pur-
8 New York Shipbuilding Corporation, 89 NLRB 915 ; Boston Machine Works Company,
89 NLRB 59 , and cases cited therein.
3 Cf. Telex, Inc., 90 NLRB 202.
COLUMBIA RIVER SALMON AND TUNA PACKERS ASS'N 1427
porting to show that a substantial number of the employees in the
contract unit are no longer members of the Intervenor.
The Petitioner's argument requires that we construe this, contract
provision as one which makes the Union's status as a majority repre-
sentative of the employees of each of the several employers covered
by the contract dependent upon daily fluctuations in the Union's mem-
bership. We do not believe that the language in question need be so
construed, and the record establishes that the parties did not construe
it in that manner. Rather, we believe that it merely makes the con-
tract operative at the plant of any employer where the Intervenor,
at the time the contract was executed, represented a majority of em-
ployees. And, in accord with our established policy, in a representa-
tion case we do not inquire on the issue of contract bar, into the ques-
tion of whether at the time the contract was executed a majority of
the employees had designated the union as their bargaining
representative."
Upon the basis of the foregoing and the entire record in the case
we conclude that the current contract between the Intervenor and the
Association bars a new determination of representatives at this time.
Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition.
ORDER
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed by Columbia River
Cannery and Allied Workers, Local Industrial Union No. 1747, CIO,
be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
4 Irving Feller, d/b/a Sport Girl Co. and/or Annex Sportswear, Inc., 90 NLRB No. 133.
91757 2 --51-vo l. 91--11 l