Local Union 1692, Int't Longshoremen's, Etc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 29, 1960

127 N.L.R.B. 1567 (N.L.R.B. 1960)

LOCAL UNION 1692, INT'L LONGSHOREMEN'S, ETC. 1567
at Olympic Boulevard. The work performed by them is of the type
usually performed by experienced electricians with 4 years' appren-
tice training and some of them are journeymen. The record shows,
and the parties do not dispute, that their work is that of skilled craft
electricians. They are, therefore, entitled to separate representation
if they so desire. As the Petitioner is a union which traditionally
represents electricians, we shall direct an election in the following
voting group at the Employer's Olympic Boulevard and Van Nuys,
California, plants:'
All maintenance electricians, their helpers and apprentices, leadmen,
and working foremen, excluding all other employees and supervisors
as defined in the Act.8
If a majority vote for the Petitioner, they will be taken to have
indicated their desire to be represented in a separate unit and the
Regional Director conducting the election directed herein is instructed
in that event to issue a certification of representatives to the Petitioner
for such unit which the Board under the circumstances finds to be
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. If, however, a
majority vote for the Intervenor, they will be taken to have indicated
their desire to remain a part of the existing production and mainte-
nance unit and the Regional Director is instructed to issue a certificate
of results of election to that effect.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
7 If the Petitioner does not wish to proceed to an election in the unit found appropriate,
which is broader in scope than that petitioned for, we shall permit it to withdraw its
petition upon notice to the Regional Director, within 5 days of the issuance of this
Decision, who shall thereupon vacate the Direction of Election.
8 There is no dispute as to the composition of the unit.
Local Unite No. 1692 , International Longshoremen's Association,
Independent , and International Longshoremen 's Association,
Independent and J & R Contractors , Inc. Case No. 23-CC-63
(formerly 39-CC-63). June 29,1960
DECISION AND ORDER
On a charge and amended charge duly filed on August 25 and Sep-
tember 15, 1959, respectively, by J & R Contractors, Inc., herein
referred to as J & R, the General Counsel of the National Labor
Relations Board, by the Regional Director for the Twenty-third
Region, issued a complaint and notice of hearing dated October 15,
1959, against Local Union No. 1692, International Longshoremen's
Association, Independent, and International Longshoremen's Associ-
127 NLRB No. 181.
1568 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ation, Independent, herein referred to as Respondents, alleging that
the Respondents had engaged in and were engaging in unfair labor
practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section
8 (b) (4) (A) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. True
copies of the complaint and notice of hearing were thereafter duly
served upon the Respondents and J & R as the Charging Party. The
Respondents filed answers denying the commission of the alleged
unfair labor practices.
On December 14, 1959, the parties entered into a stipulation by
which they waived the customary hearing and procedure before a
Trial Examiner, with the intent that the record as stipulated be trans-
mitted directly to the Board for decision thereon without further
notice. The parties expressly waived the taking of further testimony
or any hearing or further hearing before a Trial Examiner or Board
Member, the issuance of an Intermediate Report, the making of find-
ings of fact, conclusions of law, or recommended order, and the filing
of any exceptions thereto; provided, however, the parties might re-
quest permission of the Board to argue orally before it and file briefs
on or before December 30, 1959, or such further time as the Board
might allow.
The parties further stipulated that the record in this case should
consist of the charges, complaint and notice of hearing, the answer of
the Respondents, the order postponing a hearing indefinitely, and the
record including the transcript of testimony and exhibits of photo-
graphs, in the matter of Clifford W. Potter, Regional Director for the
Twenty-third Region of the National Labor Relations Board for and
on behalf of the National Labor Relations Board v. Clerks and
Checkers Local No. 1692, International Longshoremen's Association,
Independent, before the United States District Court for the Southern
District of Texas, Corpus Christi Division, Civil Actions Nos. 1885
and 1886. It was agreed that the aforesaid evidence might be viewed
as though adduced at a hearing before a Trial Examiner, provided,
however, that the parties did not waive any objections made at the
said proceeding concerning relevancy, materiality, or admissibility of
any of said evidence.
By order dated December 22, 1959, the Board approved the stipu-
lation and made it a part of the record herein, and transferred and
continued the proceeding before the Board. Neither party requested
oral argument. Only the General Counsel filed a brief.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Bean and Jenkins].
On the basis of the aforesaid stipulation and the entire record in
this case, the Board makes the following :
LOCAL UNION 1692, INT'L LONGSHOREMEN'S, ETC . 1569
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANIES INVOLVED
J & R Contractors, Inc., is a Texas corporation with its office and
principal place of business in Houston, Texas. Since August 17, 1959,
it has been engaged at Port Aransas, Texas, in unloading and reloading
of bauxite ore from ships to barges for the Aluminum Company of
America, herein referred to as Alcoa. The services performed by
J & R are valued at approximately $50,000 monthly. It further
appears that the Aluminum Company of America is engaged in the
production and sale of aluminum and that during the preceding year
it has caused to be shipped to its Point Comfort, Texas, plant from
points outside the State of Texas and the continental United States
materials of a value in excess of $50,000. The parties are agreed that
J & R Contractors, Inc., and the Aluminum Company of America
are engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) of the
Act. On the basis of the stipulation of the parties and the record as
a whole, we find that J & R Contractors, Inc., is engaged in commerce
within the meaning of the Act and that it will effectuate the policies
of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this proceeding.
II. THE LABOR ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Local Union No. 1692, International Longshoremen's Association,
Independent, and International Longshoremen's Association, Inde-
pendent, are labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5)
of the Act.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
On August 17, 1959, J & R Contractors, Inc., entered into an agree-
ment with Alcoa to unload from ships arriving at Port Aransas, Texas,
bauxite ore intended for Alcoa's plant at Point Comfort, Texas. Prior
thereto such services were performed by the Corpus Christi Steve-
doring Company. Ships arriving at the port for the discharge of their
cargo had tQ be towed into channel waters and when departing had to
be towed to open gulf waters. This towing service was performed by
the G & H Towing Company, herein referred to as G & H, under
contract with Alcoa. Once moored at a floating dock in the channel,
the ore was removed by J & R from the ship by crane and placed in
barges located alongside the vessel. The loaded barges were then
towed to the Point Comfort plant of Alcoa some 80 miles distant from
Port Aransas. The towing service to Point Comfort was performed
by Federal Barge Lines, herein referred to as Federal, also under
contract with Alcoa.
On August 10, 1959, before J & R had executed its contract to as-
sume control of operations, Joe Blair and Clarence Vandever, presi-
5 60940-6A--vo1. 127-100
1570 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
dent and business manager, respectively, of Respondent International's
Local 1224,1 approached E. Jack Walton, president of J & R, for the
purpose of finding out if Walton would agree to employ the time-
keepers and other classification of employees then represented by
Respondent International's Locals and then employed by Corpus
Christi Stevedoring. The initial meeting, according to Respondents'
representatives' testimony, resulted in a commitment by Walton to hire
Respondent Local 1692's timekeepers. This was denied by Walton.'
In any event, Walton refused to hire Respondent Local's timekeepers.
On August 19, after a further attempt by Respondent Local's repre-
sentatives to have Walton hire union timekeepers had failed, Re-
spondent Local, sometime between 6:30 and 7:30 p.m. that day, estab-
lished a picket line.
The picketing took place along a public highway leading to, and
some 300 to 400 yards from, an old ferry landing where J & R em-
ployees were picked up by boat and transported to their work. Em-
ployees of G & H and Federal, as well as those of J & R, had to pass
the picket line to get to their places of employment.3 The picket sign
displayed by the pickets read :
UNFAIR
To I.L.A. Local #1692
On or about August 22, the Respondent Local also began picketing the
offshore operations by boat. The pickets carried a sign similar to the
one displayed on land. Offshore picketing took place at a time when
the Alcoa ship, the William Curry, was moored at the dock and while
the ship's crew was aboard the vessel. As a result of the picketing,
employees of Federal refused to move the loaded barges, although
Alcoa requested Federal to do so, and G & H informed Walton that
they would not move the Curry to open waters, after she had been un-
loaded, as long as there was a picket line.
As a result of G & H's refusal to move the Curry, Alcoa engaged
the firm of Bauer & Smith to perform these services. On August 27,
while the Bauer & Smith tug was towing the Curry to open water,
the Respondents' picket boat followed and circled the two vessels for
400 yards or more. The picket sign in the boat was clearly visible to
the crews of the tug and the ship. On August 28, the Respondents
abandoned their picketing by boat when the questionable validity of
such picketing was brought to their attention. It also appears that
by September 1, the Respondents inserted in relatively small lettering,
1 According to Vandever, he had authority, where Respondent Local 1692' s interests
were involved, to negotiate on behalf of Local 1692
2 See Clerks and Checkers Local Union No. 1692 et at. (J & R Contractors, Inc.),
127 NLRB 676
'There was some testimony to the effect that employees of a firm known as Scribner
and Richardson also used the public highway to get to their place of employment ; how-
ever, the record does not make clear whether Scribner and Richardson performed any
services for Alcoa or any of the other employers.
LOCAL UNION 1692, INT'L LONGSHOREMEN'S, ETC. 1571
the words "J & R Contractors, Inc." above the prominently displayed
word "UNFAIR" on their picket signs.
As set forth in the stipulation of the parties, the constitution and
rules of order of Respondent International provides in article XX,
section 1, that :
No strike shall be ordered, except by the International President
of the I.L.A. In addition thereto, whenever conditions arise
wherein it becomes necesary for the protection of the rights of
the members of a Local Union or of Local Unions to call a strike,
such Local Union or Unions shall refer the question to all inter-
ested Locals for consideration, and if a majority of the member-
ship of the interested Locals vote in favor of a strike, the calling
of such strike shall be requested of the international President.
No Local shall go out on strike without first obtaining the consent
thereto of the Executive Council through International head-
quarters. Upon such consent, the International President shall
order the said Locals to quit work.
It also appears from the uncontroverted testimony of Philip Mundy,
piers and cargo handling manager for Alcoa Steamship Company in
the city of New York, that the Respondent International was aware
of a dispute between Respondent Local and "J & R Contracting Com-
pany," and that on August 19, Respondent International's president,
Captain Bradley, informed Mundy, in the course of a telephone con-
versation to which a Respondent International's organizer in Texas
was a party, that "Unless the trouble in Texas was put right, he
[Bradley] would picket all ships arriving down there as soon as she
[sic] arrived."
Conclusions
We find on the basis of the foregoing facts and the record as a
whole that Respondents violated Section 8(b) (4) (A) of the Act by
their picketing of the public highway and the offshore installation.
It is evident that the place where J & R was engaged in its normal
business was at the offshore installation and that it must therefore
be accepted as the place which harbored the sites of the dispute be-
tween the Respondents and J & R. The General Counsel, however,
contends that the picketing was unlawful because it violated the con-
ditions established by the Board in the Moore Dry Dock case 4 for
common situs picketing. In Moore Dry Dock, the Board established
four criteria for determining when picketing of a secondary em-
ployer's premises harboring the situs of the dispute is lawful pri-
mary picketing.' The principles of the Moore Dry Dock case are
Sailors Union of the Pacific , AFL (Moore Dry Dock Company ), 92 NLRB 547
s Picketing is held not to violate Section 8 ( b) (4) (A) if : ( 1) The picketing was strictly
limited to times when the situs of the dispute is located on the secondary employer's
premises ; ( 2) at the time of the picketing the primary employer was engaged in its
1572 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
here applicable, and we find that the third and fourth criteria were
not followed by the Respondents. In our opinion the Respondents in
establishing a picket line some 300 to 400 yards distant from the
water's edge at a point on a public highway were employees of neu-
tral employers on their way to and from work would have to pass,
did not picket as reasonably close to the situs of the dispute as
possible. It is inconceivable that at that distance from the water's
edge the picketing would have been visible to the employees at the
offshore installation, which itself was located some 400 yards from
the shore. There is nothing in the record to show that the Respond-
ents could not have availed themselves of lawful picketing by boat
within the immediate vicinity of the offshore installation. Further-
more, if the Respondents desired to picket on land, the logical place
for such picketing was at the ferry landing where only J & R em-
ployees embarked for their work. Picketing at that point, as the
evidence shows, was possible, and would have made it unnecessary
to interfere with the employees of Federal and G & H who used the
public highway to get to their places of employment. Under the
circumstances, we believe that by picketing the public highway at
such a distance from the situs of the dispute the Respondents intended
thereby to induce and encourage employees of neutral employers to
strike or engage in a concerted refusal to perform services for their
respective employers with the object of forcing the employers to
cease doing business with Alcoa.
We are also of the opinion that the highway and boat picketing was
unlawful because it failed to disclose clearly that the dispute was with
the primary employer, J & R, and not with Federal, G &H, or Alcoa.
The failure to identify clearly the primary employer made all of the
Respondents' picketing unlawful. While the Respondents had every
right to publicize their dispute with J & R, they could do so only in
a manner which made it clear to employees of neutral employers that
their employers were not involved in the dispute,
The Respondents apparently contend, however, that although they
knew that % Talton had the authority to hire timekeepers, they could
not tell if he was the employer or merely the representative of some
employing company. Hence, they argue, they could not indicate that
their dispute was with Walton for fear of being in error, and knew
no other name to display. Apart from the fact that we do not believe
the Respondents were without knowledge of the true identity of the
employer, we think that the more lack of such knowledge does not
justify an infringement of the right of a neutral employer not to be
drawn into a dispute which is not his. Reasonable conduct would
normal business at the situs ; ( 3) the picketing is placed as reasonably close to the loca-
tion of the situs as possible ; and (4 ) the picketing discloses clearly that the dispute
is with the primary employer and not with the secondary employer
LOCAL UNION 1692, INT'L LONGSHOREMEN 'S, ETC. 1573
presuppose that the Respondents would make an effort to learn the
identity of the employer whom they were going to label as unfair.
This they failed to do.' However , we find in any event that the
Respondents did have reasonably accurate knowledge of the em-
ployer's identity. This is shown by the statement which Respondent
International 's president , Captain Bradley , made to Mundy , that the
Union was involved in a dispute with "J&-, R Contracting Company"
and that "unless the trouble in Texas was put right , he would picket
all ships arriving [there]." Such failure to make use of the knowl-
edge of the employer's identity is one element in establishing the
Respondents ' intent to involve neutral employers , and the existence
of such unlawful intent is further demonstrated by Respondents' con-
duct in picketing by boat the Bauer & Smith tug and the Curry on
August 27 after those vessels had left the common situs and had
proceeded a substantial distance therefrom.
As indicated above, section 1 of article XX of the Respondent
International 's constitution and rules of order provided , in essence,
that no local of the International could institute a strike without ob-
taining the International's consent, and that the order to quit work had
to be given by the International president. We are convinced on the
basis of the evidence in the record that the Respondent International
had knowledge of the contemplated action to be taken by the Re-
spondent Local in its dispute with J & R and that the Respondent
International consented thereto. We find, therefore, that the Inter-
national is equally liable with the Respondent Local for the unfair
labor practices committed.
In view of all of the foregoing and upon the record as a whole, we
find that the Respondents violated Section 8(b) (4) (A) of the Act by
inducing and encouraging employees of Federal Barge Lines, G & H
Towing Company, Aluminum Company of America, and Baner &
Smith to engage in a strike or concerted refusal to perform services
for their respective employers with an object of forcing their employ-
ers to cease doing business with Aluminum Company of America, and
to force the latter to cease doing business with J & R Contractors, Inc.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COM MERCE
The activities of the Respondents as set forth above which are
found to constitute unfair labor practices , occurring in connection
with the operations of the Companies involved herein, have a close,
intimate , and substantial relation to trade, traffic , and commerce
among the several States and foreign countries and tend to lead to
labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow
of commerce.
O Respondent Local's vice president , G. A. Eddy, admitted that on the occasion of his
meeting with Walton on August 19, he should have asked him for such information, but
"didn't think of it at the time."
1574 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
V. TIIE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondents have engaged in unfair labor
practices, we shall require them to cease and desist therefrom and to
take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of
the Act.
We also find that the Respondents' conduct in picketing Federal and
G & H and extending such picketing to Bauer & Smith as soon as that
employer began furnishing services to Alcoa in connection with the
unloading operations, indicates a likelihood that the Respondents
will continue such violations when situations comparable to those
presented in the instant case occur. We shall, therefore, order the
Respondents to cease and desist from the commission of similar unfair
labor practices not only with respect to the named neutral employers
but with respect to other employers.
ORDER
Upon the entire record in this case and pursuant to Section 10(c)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor
Relations Board hereby orders that the Respondents International
Longshoremen's Association, Independent, and Local Union No.
1692, International Longshoremen's Association, Independent, their
officers, representatives, agents, successors, and assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from engaging in or inducing or encouraging
the employees of Federal Barge Lines, G & H Towing Company, Alu-
minum Company of America, Bauer & Smith, or any other employer,
to engage in a strike or a concerted refusal to use, manufacture, proc-
ess, transport, or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles,
materials, or commodities, or to perform any services, where an object
thereof is to force or require said employers to cease doing business
with Aluminum Company of America, or to force or require Alumi-
num Company to cease doing business with J & R Contractors, Inc.
2. Take the following affirmative action, which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Post at its respective offices, hiring halls, and meeting halls
copies of the notice attached hereto marked "Appendix." I Copies of
said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the Twenty-
third Region, shall, after being duly signed by authorized representa-
tives of the Respondents, be posted by Respondents immediately upon
receipt thereof and be maintained by them for a period of 60 consecu-
tive days thereafter in conspicuous places including all places where
notices to members are customarily posted. Reasonable steps shall be
7In the event that this Order is enforced by a decree of a United States Court of
Appeals, there shall be substituted for the words "Pursuant to a Decision and Order"
the words "Pursuant to a Decree of the United States Court of Appeals, Enforcing an
Order "
LOCAL UNION 1692, INT'L LONGSHOREMEN'S, ETC. 1575•
taken by the Respondents to insure that the notices are not altered,,
defaced, or covered by any other material.
(b) Furnish to the Regional Director for the Twenty-third Region
signed copies of the notice attached hereto marked "Appendix" for
posting on the premises of Federal Barge Lines, G & H Towing Com-
pany, Aluminum Company of America, and Bauer & Smith in places
where notices to their employees are customarily posted, if said Com-
panies are willing to do so. Copies of said notice, to be furnished by
the Regional Director for the Twenty-third Region, shall, after being
duly signed by an authorized representative of the Respondents, be
forthwith returned to the Regional Director for such posting.
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Twenty-third Region, in
writing, within 10 days from the date of this Order, what steps the
Respondents have taken to comply herewith.
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSO-
CIATION, INDEPENDENT , AND LOCAL UNION No. 1692, INTERNATIONAL
LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INDEPENDENT , AND TO ALL
EMPLOYEES
Pursuant to a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations
Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended, we hereby notify you that:
WE WILL NOT engage in, or induce or encourage the employees
of Federal Barge Lines, G & H Towing Company, Aluminum
Company of America, Bauer & Smith, or any other employer, to
engage in a strike or concerted refusal in the course of their em-
ployment to use, manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise
handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities,
or to perform any services where an object thereof is to force or
require such employers to cease doing business with the Aluminum
Company of America, or to force or require the Aluminum Com-
pany of America, to cease doing business with J & R Contractors,,
Inc.
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSOCIATION,
INDEPENDENT ,
Labor Organization.
Dated---------------- By-------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
LOCAL UNION No. 1692, INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S
ASSOCIATION, INDEPENDENT,
Labor Organization.
Dated---------------- By-------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof,
and must not be altered , defaced, or covered by any other material.