International Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 26, 1953

106 N.L.R.B. 1030 (N.L.R.B. 1953)

1 030 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S & WAREHOUSEMEN'S
UNION, LOCAL 12 and UPPER COLUMBIA RIVER TOWING
COMPANY AND RIVER TERMINALS COMPANY, Case No.
36-CD-11 . August 26, 1953
DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
This proceeding arises under Section 10 (k) of the Act,
which provides that " Whenever it is charged that any person
has engaged in an unfair labor practice within the meaning of
paragraph ( 4)(D) of Section 8 (b), the Board is empowered and
directed to hear and determine the dispute out of which such
unfair labor practice shall have arisen...."
On May 20, 1953, Upper Columbia River Towing Company,
herein called Upper Columbia, and River Terminals Company,
herein called River Terminals , filed with the Regional Director
for the Nineteenth Region a charge alleging that International
Longshoremen ' s and Warehousemen 's Union, Local 12, herein
called the I. L. W. U., has engaged in and is engaging in certain
activities proscribed by Section 8 (b) (4) (D) of the Act.
Thereafter , pursuant to Section 10 (k) of the Act and Sections
102.71 and 102.72 of the Board ' s Rules and Regulations, the
Regional Director investigated the charge and provided for a
hearing upon due notice to all parties . The hearing was held
before Howard A. McIntyre, hearing officer , on June 3 and 4,
1953. All parties appeared at the hearing and were afforded
full opportunity to be heard , to examine and cross - examine
witnesses , and to adduce evidence bearing on the issues.'
The rulings of the hearing officer made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All
parties were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the
Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board2 finds:
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYERS
Upper Columbia is a State of Washington corporation with
its principal office at Vancouver , Washington . It operates under
a permit from the Interstate Commerce Commission, and is
engaged principally in the transportation of petroleum and lum-
ber on the Columbia River in the States of Washington and
Oregon . Upper Columbia's gross revenue during the past year
was in excess of $400,000.
River Terminals handles the interchange of products from
shore facilities to floating equipment and vice versa. Both com-
'Pacific Coast Boatmen 's Union, herein called the P . C B. U., was served with notice of
hearing, but did not appear.
2 Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member panel [Members
Houston , Murdock, and Peterson].
106 NLRB No. 159.
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S & WAREHOUSEMEN'S UNION 1031
panies have the same ownership and management . Employees
of the two companies are often used interchangeably.
The I. L. W. U. contends that the impact of the particular
dispute upon commerce is so slight , the Board should not
assert jurisdiction . We find no merit in this contention. The
Board determines jurisdiction upon the basis of the overall
operations of a primary employer . ' Accordingly , we find that
Upper Columbia and River Terminals are engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act, and that it would effectuate the
policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Longshoremen ' s & Warehousemen ' s Union,
Local 12, and Pacific Coast Boatmen's Union are labor organi-
zations within the meaning of the Act.
III. THE DISPUTE
A. The Facts
Upper Columbia, as previously indicated , is engaged in trans-
porting lumber and other products along the Columbia River. In
April 1953, Upper Columbia contracted with the Al Peirce Lum-
ber Company , Coos Bay, Oregon , to carry abargeload of lumber
from Coos Bay to California.
Subsequently, Ray Waters, an agent for Upper Columbia, dis-
cussed with John Briggs, a dispatcher in the joint employ of the
I. L. W. U. and the employers signatory to the master agreement
between the I. L. W. U. and various Pacific coast shipping asso-
ciations , the use of longshoremen to work on barges of Upper
Columbia.
On May 4, 1953. the P. C. B. U. sent a telegram to Upper
Columbia, with a copy to the I. L. W. U., claiming the right
to load the barges by virtue of its status as the certified
bargaining representative of the employees of Upper Columbia
and River Terminals.4
On the evening of May 7, Waters attempted to complete
arrangements with the I. L. W. U. for 3 longshoremen to be
assigned to Upper Columbia the next day, but was told he would
have to call the Longshore Hall the next morning . Waters did
call the Hall the next morning, and requested 3 longshoremen
to help load the Upper Columbia barge then anchored at the
Al Peirce mill dock. When the 3 longshoremen reached the
dock, their spokesman presented for signature to Upper Colum-
bia's president , contracts covering some conditions of employ-
3Paul W. Speer, Inc., 94 NLRB 317.
,'On October 19, 1949, following an election, P C. B. U. was certified by the Regional
Director as the representative of all employees of River Terminals. On October 24, 1949,
following another election, P C B. U. was certified by the Regional Director as the repre-
sentative of all employees of Upper Columbia, Inland Navigation Company, and Columbia
Snake River Towing Company. The latter two companies are not involved in this case.
1032 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ment. After consultation with his attorney, the president in-
formed the I.L.W.U. representative that the contract with the
P. C. B. U. precluded his signing any agreement with the 1. L. W. U.
On May 14, the president wrote to the I.L.W.U. advising it
that the Upper Columbia would be "unable to enter into any con-
tract with your union or to employ persons who are not members
of the Pacific Coast Boatmen's Union."
On the evening of May 17, another Upper Columbia barge
pulled into the Al Peirce dock, the first barge having been re-
moved for another job. Upper Columbia's president called the
I.L.W.U. and informed it that he was going to start loading the
barge the next day using only P.C.B.U. men already in his
employ. Shortly after loading started the following morning,
I. L. W. U. members began picketing the dock where the barge
was being loaded. Loading thereupon ceased.5
B. Contentions of the parties
Upper Columbia and River Terminals, the charging parties,
assert that by the above conducttheI. L. W. U. violated Section
8 (b) (4) (D) of the amended Act. The I. L. W. U. contends that
it is entitled to the work by virtue of a certification of the Board
determining the bargaining representative for employees per-
forming the work of loading Upper Columbia barges.
C. Applicability of the statute
The I. L. W. U. asserts that a certification of representatives
issued in 1938 covers the particular work involved in this dis-
pute and that the I. L. W. U. is therefore entitled to picket to
protect its right to this work.
In 1938, the Board certified International Longshoremen's and
Warehousemen's Union, District No. 1, as bargaining repre-,
sentative for all "workers who do longshore work in the Pacific
Coast ports of the United States for the Companies which are
members of" certain named employer associations.$ Neither
Upper Columbia nor River Terminals has ever been a number of
these employer associations. We conclude that the 1938 certi-
ficate does not apply to employees of these two employers.?
D. Merits of the dispute
At the time the I. L. W. U. picketed the Al Peirce dock while
Upper Columbia ' s barge was being loaded , Upper Columbia had
5 At the time, Al Peirce Company employees were moving lumber from the mill to the
dock, and Upper Columbia employees were loading the barge. The record shown that the Al
Peirce employees stopped work when the picketing began There was no lumber for Upper
Columbia employees to load thereafter. When the Upper Columbia barge pulled away from the
Al Peirce dock, the pickets followed the barge.
6Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast, etc., 7 NLRB 1002, 1042.
7 Cf. International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, Local No. 16, C. I. O.
(Juneau Spruce Corporation), 82 NLRB 650.
ELLIOTT COMPANY, CROCKER-WHEELER DIVISION 1033
assigned the loading work to its own employees , members of
P. C. $. U. The dispute was therefore one over an employer's
assignment of work to employees in one labor organization
rather than to employees in another labor organization.
It is well established that an employer is free to make such
assignments free of strike pressure by a labor organization,
"unless such employer is failing to conform to an order or
certification of the Board determining the bargaining repre-
sentative for employees performing such work."8 As found
above, the I. L. W. U. is not the certified bargaining repre-
sentative for employees performing the work involved.
We find, accordingly, that the I. L. W. U. was not lawfully
entitled to require Upper Columbia and River ' Terminals to
assign loading work to members of the I. L. W. U. rather
than to members of the P. C. B. U.
We are not, however, by this action to be regarded as
"assigning " the loading work to the P. C. B. U. 9
DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon
the entire record in this case, the Board makes the following
determination of dispute pursuant to Section 10 (k) of the
amended Act:
1. International Longshoremen ' s & Warehousemen ' s Union,
Local 12, is not, and has not been, lawfully entitled to force or
require Upper Columbia River Towing Company, or River Ter-
minals Company to assign loading work to its members rather
than to members of another labor organization.
2. Within ten (10 ) days from the date of this Decision and
Determination of Dispute , the Respondent shall notify the
Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region, in writing, as to
what steps the Respondent has taken to comply with the terms
of this Decision and Determination of Dispute.
8 Local Union No. 553 , Affiliated with the United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices
of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada , A. F. L. (Alton
Water Company), 106 NLRB 819.
9Los Angeles Building and Construction Trades Council , AFL (Westinghouse Electric
Corporation ), 83 NLRB 477.
ELLIOTT COMPANY, CROCKER - WHEELER DIVISION, and
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS,
LOCAL 68, AFL, Petitioner . Case No. 2-RC - 5647 . August
26, 1953
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 ( c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John J.
t The name of the Employer appears as corrected at the hearing.
106 NLRB No. 155.