Luckenbach Steamship Co., Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 31, 1936

2 N.L.R.B. 181 (N.L.R.B. 1936)

In the Matters of LUCKENBACH STEAMSHIP COMPANY, INC., Asso-
CIATED-BANNING COMPANY, UNITED FRUIT COMPANY, DOLLAR
STEAMSHIP LINES, SAN FRANCISCO STEVEDORING COMPANY, AMERI-
CAN-HAWAIIAN STEAMSHIP COMPANY, MATSON NAVIGATION COM-
PANY, MCCORMICK STEAMSHIP COMPANY, UNION STEAM SHIP
COMPANY OF NEW ZEALAND , LTD., NELSON STEAMSHIP COMPANY,
OCEAN TERMINALS , INC., PACIFIC STEAMSHIP LINES, ARROW LINE,
PACIFIC ORIENTAL TERMINALS COMPANY, NIPPON YUSEN KAISHA
LINE, GRACE LINE, BAY CITIES TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, WIL-
LIAM, DIMOND & COMPANY , SUDDEN & CHRISTENSON , KINGSLEY
COMPANY OF CALIFORNIA and GATEMEN , WATCHMEN AND MISCEL-
LANEOUS WATERFRONT WORKERS UNION , LOCAL 38-124 ; INTERNA-
TIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSOCIATION
Cases Nos. R-41 to 1-60, inclusive
Decided August 31, 1936
Water Transportation. Industry-Electaon Ordered: controversy concerning
representation of employees-majority status disputed by employer-question
affecting commerce : employees in occupations directly connected with interstate
commerce-Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : community of interest;
eligibility for membership in only organization among employees-Certification
of Representatives.
Mr. Bertram Edises and Mr. David C . Shaw for the Board.
Mr. Gregory A. Harrison and Mr. Frank C. Gregory, of San
Francisco , Cal., for Luckenbach Steamship Co., Inc., United Fruit
Co., Dollar Steamship Lines, San Francisco Stevedoring Co., Ameri-
can-Hawaiian Steamship Co., Matson Navigation Co., McCormick
Steamship Co., Nelson Steamship Co., Ocean Terminals, Inc., Pacific
Steamship Lines, Arrow Line, Pacific Oriental Terminals Co., Grace
Line, Williams Dimond & Co., Sudden & Christenson , and Kingsley
Company of California.
Mr. J. L . King, Jr., of San Francisco , Cal., for Union Steam Ship
Company of New Zealand, Ltd.
Or. H. J. Surratt, of San Francisco , Cal., for Bay Cities Trans-
portation Co.
Mr. H. P . Melnikow and Mr. Janes Landye, of San Francisco,
Cal., for the Union.
Mary Lemon Schleifer, of counsel to the Board.
181
182 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DECISION
STATEMENT OF CASE
On April 1, 1936, Gatemen, Watchmen and Miscellaneous Water-
front Workers Union, Local 38-124; International Longshoremen's
Association, hereinafter referred to as the Union, filed 20 petitions
with the Regional Director for the Twentieth Region alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning certain classes
of employees employed by Luckenbach Steamship Company, Inc.,
Associated-Banning Company,' United Fruit Company, Dollar
Steamship Lines,2 San Francisco Stevedoring Company, American-
Hawaiian Steamship Company, Matson Navigation Company, Mc-
Cormick Steamship Company, Union Steam Ship Company of New
Zealand, Ltd., Nelson Steamship Company, Ocean Terminals, Inc.,3
Pacific Steamship Lines,4 Arrow Line, Pacific Oriental Terminals
Company,5 Nippon Yusen Kaisha Line, Grace Line, Bay Cities
Transportation Company, Williams Dimond & Company, Sudden &
Christenson and Kingsley Company of California, and requesting
investigations and certifications of representatives pursuant to Sec-
tion 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, approved July 5,
1935. On May 22, 1936, the National Labor Relations Board, herein-
after referred to as the Board, duly authorized the Regional Director
for the Twentieth Region to conduct investigations and provide for
appropriate hearings in connection therewith. On May 29, 1936, the
Regional Director issued and duly served notices to each of the Com-
panies named above, of a hearing to be held on June 22, 1936, at
San Francisco, California. Copies of the notices of hearing were sent
to the Union.
Pursuant to amended notices of hearing duly served upon all the
Companies named above and upon the Union, a hearing was held
before Charles A. Wood, a Trial Examiner duly designated by the
Board, in San Francisco on July 15 and continued on July 16 and 17,
1936. The Union and all of the Companies named above were rep-
resented and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. By stipulation
of all parties concerned, it was agreed that one hearing should be
held and that the evidence adduced should apply to each of the Com-
panies severally. Many objections to the admission of evidence were
1 Erroneously designated as Associated Terminals Company in the petition.
2 Erroneously designated as Dollar Steamship Lines, Inc Ltd in the petition
D Erroneously designated as General Steamship Corporation, Ltd , in the petition.
4 Erroneously designated as Admiral Line in the petition.
5 Erroneously designated as Silver Java Pacific Line in the petition.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 183
made by counsel representing the Companies . The Board has re-
viewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudi-
cial errors were committed.
Upon the evidence adduced at the hearing and from the entire
record now before it , the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE COMPANIES
Luckenbach Steamship Company, Inc., a New Jersey corporation
doing business in California , is engaged in the business of transport-
ing freight and passengers in interstate commerce on ships which
dock at San Francisco , California.
Associated -Banning Company, a California corporation, is en-
gaged in the business of furnishing stevedores and clerks for the
Nippon Yusen Kaisha Line and Pier 25, San Francisco , California.
The stevedores and clerks employed by this company handle freight
at the , docks of San Francisco , California , carried on ships engaged
in foreign commerce.
United Fruit Company , a New Jersey corporation doing business
in California , is engaged in the transportation of freight and passen-
gers in interstate and foreign commerce on ships which dock at San
Francisco , California.
Dollar Steamship Lines, a Delaware corporation doing business in
California , is engaged in the transportation of freight and passen-
gers in interstate and foreign commerce on ships which dock at San
Francisco , California.
San Francisco Stevedoring Company, a California corporation, is
engaged in the business of stevedoring , and in the course and conduct
of such business loads and discharges cargo at the docks at San
Francisco , California , carried on ships engaged in interstate and
foreign commerce.
American-Hawaiian Steamship Company, a Delaware corporation
doing business in San Francisco , California , is engaged in the busi-
ness of transporting freight in interstate commerce on ships which
dock at San Francisco , California.
Matson Navigation Company, a California corporation , is engaged
in the business of transporting freight and passengers in interstate
commerce on ships which dock at San Francisco , California . It also
acts as agent for other '•stearnship - companies, -transporting freight
and passengers in foreign commerce.
McCormick Steamship Company, a California corporation, is en-
gaged in the business of transporting freight in interstate commerce
184 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and freight and passengers in foreign commerce on ships which dock
at San Francisco, California.
Union Steam Ship Company of New Zealand, Ltd., a New Zealand
corporation doing business in California, is engaged in the business
of transporting freight and passengers in foreign commerce on ships
which dock at San Francisco, California.
Nelson Steamship Company, a California corporation, is engaged
in the business of transporting freight and passengers in interstate
and foreign commerce on ships which dock at San Francisco, Cali-
fornia.6
Ocean Terminals, Inc., a California corporation, is engaged in the
business of stevedoring and in the course and conduct of such busi-
ness loads and discharges cargo at the docks of San Francisco, Cali-
fornia, carried on ships engaged in interstate and foreign commerce.
Pacific Steamship Lines, a Nevada corporation doing business in
California, is engaged in the business of transporting freight and
passengers in interstate and foreign commerce on ships which dock
at San Francisco, California.
Arrow Line is engaged in the business of transporting freight in
interstate commerce on ships which dock at San Francisco, California.
Pacific Oriental Terminals Company, a California corporation, is
engaged in the business of stevedoring and in the course and conduct
of such business loads and discharges cargo at the docks of San Fran-
cisco, California, carried on ships engaged in interstate and foreign
commerce.
Nippon Yusen Kaisha Line is engaged in the business of trans-
porting freight and passengers in foreign commerce on ships which
dock at San Francisco, California.
Grace Line, a Maryland corporation doing business in California,
is engaged in the business of transporting freight and passengers in
interstate and foreign commerce on ships which dock at San Fran-
cisco, California.
Bay Cities Transportation Company is engaged in the business
of transporting freight by barges. In the course and conduct of such
business it receives and transports freight bound to and from ships
engaged in transporting freight in interstate and foreign commerce.
Williams Dimond & Company, a California corporation, is en-
gaged in the business of representing steamship companies as agents
O An order of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California,
No. 27277-S , dated May 15, 1936, appointed a trustee for the Charles Nelson Company and
its subsidiary , the Nelson Steamship Company, in reorganization ' proceedings under Sec.
77B of the Bankruptcy Act. Such an order has been held not to suspend or interfere with
a proceeding under the National Labor Relations Act. See In the Matter of Englander
Spring Bed Company, Inc , decided July 1, 1836, by the United States District Court, East-
ern District of New York.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 185
and in connection with such activities performs services on the docks
of San Francisco, California for the account of steamship companies
engaged in interstate and foreign commerce.
Sudden & Christenson, a California corporation, is engaged in the,
business of transporting freight in interstate commerce on ships
which dock at San Francisco, California.
Kingsley Company of California, a California corporation, is en-
gaged in the business of transporting freight in interstate and for-
eign commerce on ships which dock at San Francisco, California.
All of the above Companies may be divided into four categories by
reason of their activities :
1. Those directly engaged in the transportation of freight and/or
passengers in interstate and/or foreign commerce. This category in-
cludes Luckenbach Steamship Company, Inc., United Fruit Com-
pany, Dollar Steamship Lines, American-Hawaiian Steamship
Company, Matson Navigation Company, McCormick Steamship
Company, Union Steam Ship Company of New Zealand, Ltd.,
Nelson Steamship Company, Pacific Steamship Lines, Grace Line,
Sudden & Christenson and Kingsley Company of California;
2. Those engaged in the loading and unloading of freight from
ships engaged in interstate and/or foreign commerce. This cate-
gory includes Associated-Banning Company, San Francisco Steve-
doring Company, Ocean Terminals, Inc. and Pacific Ocean Terminals
Company ;
3. Williams Dimond & Company engaged as the agent of steam-
ship companies engaged in interstate and -foreign commerce and
which, in connection with such activities, performs services on the
docks of San Francisco, California for the account of such steamship
companies; and
4. Bay Cities Transportation Company, engaged in receiving and
carrying freight bound to and from ships engaged in interstate
and foreign commerce.
We find that all of the Companies engaged in, the activities de-
scribed in the four categories above are engaged in transportation
and commerce between the States and/or between the United States
and foreign countries and in operations directly involved in such
transportation and commerce.
Testimony was introduced at the hearing that no employees in the
categories involved are employed by Arrow Line or by Nippon
Yusen Kaisha Line, such persons used by Arrow Line being em-
ployees of Sudden & Christenson, and by Nippon Yusen Kaisha Line,
employees of Associated-Banning Company. For this reason the
petitions as to these two Companies will be dismissed and these Com-
panies will not be included in the remainder of this decision.
186 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
II. THE UNION
Gatemen, Watchmen and Miscellaneous Waterfront Workers
Union, Local 38-124 , is a labor organization which is a local of In-
ternational Longshoremen 's Association , affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor. It was organized and received a charter from
the International Longshoremen 's Association in December , 1935. Its
membership is confined to gatemen , watchmen and those miscel-
laneous waterfront workers who are not eligible for membership in
the established International Longshoremen 's Association locals.
The Union lists the following classes as those waterfront workers
who are eligible for membership and on whose behalf these petitions
were filed :
1. Watchmen-who are divided into three categories :
(a) Gatemen-defined as men stationed at dock entrances,
whose duties are chiefly to inspect tickets and credentials of per-
sons seeking admission to the docks;
(b) Dock and cargo watchmen-defined as men who patrol
docks for purposes of protection against fire and theft and who
report irregularities to the companies; and
(c) Hatch watchmen-defined as men stationed in the hatches
of vessels during the loading or unloading of cargoes to observe
the condition of cargo, report damaged goods , and prevent
pilfering.
2. Baggagemen and porters-defined as men employed on pas-
senger ships on days of sailing and arrival of ships to take care of
passengers ' hand luggage.
3. Storemen-defined as men employed in handling ship's stores
from dock to ship and vice versa.
4. Gearmen-defined as men employed on the docks in the manu-
facture and maintenance of stevedoring gear. This category includes
sailmakers but does not include men who transport gear from shop
to ship.?
5. Linemen-defined as men employed to take and cast off ships'
lines.
6. Sliders-defined as men employed on two -story docks to trans-
fer cargo from one dock level to another.
7. Janitors and sweepers-janitors are defined as men who regu-
larly do janitorial work in the dock offices . Sweepers are defined
as men who regularly perform such services including the clearing
up of debris and removing of rubbish from the docks.
'' Such persons are eligible for membership in International Longshoremen's Association
Local 38-79.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 187
8. Inventory clerks-defined as men engaged in the checking and
inspection of damaged and pilfered cargo in inventory corrals, and
who frequently repair the same.
9. Dock and ship oil pumpers-defined as men engaged in loading
and discharging bulk liquid cargo.
10. Handymen-defined as men engaged as roustabouts or helpers
who do odd" jobs on the docks or on ships which are docked.
All of the activities performed by the above classes of employees
are essential to the conduct of the interstate and/or foreign com-
merce in which the above-named Companies are engaged. We find
that the employees herein involved are directly engaged in transpor-
tation and commerce between the States and/or between the United
States and foreign countries.
III. QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On or about March 5, 1936, the Union sent letters to each of the
above named Companies requesting that each of the Companies meet
with the Union for the purpose of arriving at an agreement concern-
ing the wages, hours and working conditions of their employees who
were engaged in the above named classes and who were members of
the Union. A majority of the Companies addressed replied in exactly
the same terminology asking that the Union enumerate and define
accurately each class of employees they claimed to represent and
present evidence that they represented the classes of employees in
question. It is apparent that a question has arisen as to whether or
not the Union represents such classes of employees. This question
can best be determined by the holding of an election by secret ballot.
The question which has arisen concerning the representation of
the above classes of employees of the above named Companies tends
to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and
transportation between the States and between the United States
and foreign countries and the free flow of such commerce and trans-
portation.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union states that the miscellaneous workers set forth and
defined above constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining. The reasons given by the Union for this con-
tention are that these classes of employees are not eligible for mem-
bership in any of the other International Longshoremen's Associa-
tion locals; that many of these employers employ only some of these
classes of employees and that often only a few persons are employed
by each employer in those classes which he employs; and that an or-
188 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ganization exists in which all are eligible for membership and which
can therefore represent all of these employees. The evidence sub-
stantiates all of the contentions of the Union. The evidence also
shows that some of these dock workers are regular employees em-
ployed by the week or month, some are casual employees working
a portion of the time for one employer and at other times for another
and that the rates of pay and working conditions vary among the
Companies for comparable work; that some work on a per diem
basis and some work on an hourly basis, and that many do work
at one time which comes under one of the above classifications and
at other times work under another classification. Due to these pecu-
liar circumstances of employment these employees feel that the need
for collective bargaining is great and desire to be joined in one unit.
to enhance their collective bargaining strength. The employers did
not advance any cogent reasons in opposition to such a unit. The
position of the employers was that most of these employees are
eligible for membership in other International Longshoremen's
Association locals and are covered by existing contracts and that
watchmen should not be included in the unit because of reasons set
forth hereafter. But as stated above, the evidence shows that these
employees, as defined above, are not eligible for membership either
in other International Longshoremen's Association locals or in any
other labor organization which has contracts with these employers.
The employers contend that watchmen should riot be included in
the bargaining unit because of the peculiar nature of their duties.
They claim, first, that if the watchmen are members of the same
union as the men they are engaged to watch they will not exercise
their duties in the same independent manner that they would if they
were not members of the same organization and, second, that if a
strike occurs among the other members of the Union, the watchmen
would be compelled to join the strikers, and the docks would be left
unguarded. Some testimony of a vague and general nature was
introduced on behalf of some of the employers to show that pilfer-
ing and vandalism had increased since the organization of the Union.
It is noteworthy that the only specific instance testified to was one
where a watchman who was a member of the Union had promptly
reported to his employer and to International Longshoremen's Asso-
ciation Local 38-79 the case of a longshoreman whom he had 'de-
tected pilfering. The contention of the employers that the watch-
man would in the event of a strike join the strikers is perhaps well-
-founded, but the inconvenience suffered by the employers in such
a case differs-only in degree from the inconvenience suffered when
.any other type of employee goes on strike. In addition, the testis
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 189
mony, shows that at the time of a strike of the ship's clerks em-
ployed by Luckenbach Steamship Company, inc., although the
watchmen joined in the strike on the instruction of the striking
unions, some of the watchmen remained on duty until the docks were
cleared and the companies had secured other watchmen.
The employers contend as a further reason against including
watchmen in the bargaining unit that many of the watchmen em-
ployed by them are special police officers who hold licenses as such
from the Board of Police Commissioners of San Francisco 8 and
that a rule of the Board of Police Commissioners provides : "No
Special Police Officer shall belong to any organization, association,
society or group, the activities or purposes of which will in any way
interefere with or control the work or services of any Special Police
Officer in such official capacity." The employers interpret this rule as
preventing special police officers from joining a labor organization.
The Union does not so interpret this rule and introduced evidence
to show that special police officers are represented in the Federation
of Municipal Employees of the City and County of San Francisco.
We feel it is unnecessary for us to determine the proper interpreta-
tion of the rule of the Board of Police Commissioners or to decide
whether, if the employers' interpretation of the rule be correct, a
Board of Police Commissioners has the power to deprive employees
of a right guaranteed them by the National Labor Relations Act,
for the case before us contains no charge that the right to join a
labor organization of their own choosing has been denied these
employees. We are herein concerned only with the question of whom
these employees desire to be represented by in bargaining with their
employers concerning rates of pay, wages, hours of employment and
other conditions of employment. That these watchmen are entitled
to bargain about their working conditions, that they may delegate
the bargaining to an agent, and that such agent may be a labor
organization which they may not for various reasons be eligible to
join, are matters not prohibited by the regulation under any inter-
pretation nor, we take it, seriously controverted by the employers.
Without here deciding whether or not watchmen who are special
police officers may become members of the Union, we hold that these
watchmen, whether special police officers or not, may be properly
included in the bargaining unit and may, if they desire, designate
the Union as, their representative for collective bargaining.
8 Employment figures of 14 of the Companies introduced at the hearing show that eight
Companies employ only special policemen as watchmen , three Companies employ both
special policemen and watchmen who are not special policemen , and that three Companies
employ only watchmen who are not special policemen. These same 14 Companies employ
114 watchmen , 67 of whom are special policemen and 47 of whom are not special
policemen.
0
190 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that the watchmen, baggagemen and porters, storemen,
gearmen, linemen, sliders, janitors and sweepers, inventory clerks,
dock and ship oil pumpers and handymen, as defined above, em-
ployed by each of the Companies herein involved, or any portion
of them so employed, constitute, for each Company, a unit appro-
priate for the purposes of bargaining collectively with respect to
rates of pay, wages, hours of employment and other conditions of
employment.
THE ELECTION
As previously stated some of the employees involved are regular
employees of the Companies named, and some are casual employees
working during short periods when ships are at dock and sometimes
working for more than one Company. As an election must be held
among the employees of each Company, it will be left to the dis-
cretion of the Regional Director to determine the exact day on
which each of these elections shall be held within the period desig-
nated by the Board. Every person employed-in any one of the above
categories for the Company whose employees are casting ballots on
the day selected by the Regional Director, including all regular
employees on the payroll immediately preceding the date of this
direction of election, whether working or not on that particular
day, and all casual employees working for the Company on that
particular day, even though they may have previously cast ballots
as employees of any of the other Companies herein involved, shall
be eligible to vote.
CONCLusIONs OF LAW
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact, the Board makes the
following conclusions of law:
1. The watchmen, baggagemen and porters, storemen, gearmen,
linemen, sliders, janitors and sweepers, inventory clerks, dock and
ship oil pumpers and handymen, as defined above, who are employed
by each of the Companies herein involved, or any portion of them
so employed, constitute, for each Company, a unit appropriate for
the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of the watchmen, baggagemen and porters, storemen, gear-
men, linemen, sliders, janitors and sweepers, inventory clerks, dock
and ship oil pumpers and handymen employed, respectively, by Luck-
enbach Steamship Company, Inc., Associated-Banning Company,
United Fruit Company, Dollar Steamship Lines, San Francisco
Stevedoring Company, American-Hawaiian Steamship Company,
Matson Navigation Company, McCormick Steamship Company,
0
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 191
7Jnionf `Steam 'Ship•'Company of New Zealand, Ltd., Nelson Steam-
ship Company, Ocean Terminals , Inc., Pacific Steamship Lines,
Pacific Oriental Terminals Company, Grace Line, Bay Cities Trans-
portation Company, Williams Dimond & Company, Sudden &
Christenson and Kingsley Company of California, within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (c) and Section 2, subdivisions ( 6) and (7) of the
National Labor Relations Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
AND
ORDER
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, approved July 5, 1935, and pursuant to Article III, Section
8 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations--
Series 1, as amended,
IT IS HEREBY DIRECTED, as part of the investigation authorized by
the Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective
bargaining, that elections by secret ballot shall be held under the
direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Twentieth
Region , acting in this matter as agent of the National Labor Rela-
tions Board and subject to Article III, Section 9 of said Rules and
Regulations-Series 1, as amended , within a period of four weeks
after the date of this Direction of Election on days to be designated
by the Regional Director , and subject to the rule of eligibility set
forth above , among the watchmen , baggagemen and porters , store-
men, gearmen , linemen , sliders, janitors and sweepers , inventory
clerks, dock and ship oil pumpers and handymen, or any portion of
the above-named classes, employed, respectively, by Luckenbach
Steamship Company, Inc., Associated-Banning Company, United
Fruit Company, Dollar Steamship Lines, San Francisco Stevedoring
Company, American-Hawaiian Steamship Company, Matson Navi-
gation Company, McCormick Steamship Company, Union Steam
Ship Company of New Zealand, Ltd., Nelson Steamship Company,
Ocean Terminals , Inc., Pacific Steamship Lines, Pacific Oriental
Terminals Company, Grace Line, Bay Cities Transportation Com-
pany, Williams Dimond & Company , Sudden & Christenson and
Kingsley Company of California, to determine whether they wish to
be represented by Gatemen, Watchmen and Miscellaneous Water-
front Workers Union , Local 38-124 ; International Longshoremen's
Association for the purposes of collective bargaining; and
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petitions concerning the Arrow Line
and the Nippon Yusen Kaisha Line be, and hereby are , dismissed.
192
[SAME TITLES
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
October 30, 1.936
Petitions for investigations and certifications of representatives
pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49
Stat. 449, were filed on April 1, 1936, with the Regional Director for
the Twentieth Region by Gatemen, Watchmen and Miscellaneous
Waterfront Workers Union, Local 38-124; International Longshore-
men's Association, hereinafter referred to as the Union, alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of certain classes of miscellaneous waterfront workers employed
by Luckenbach Steamship Company, Inc., Associated-Banning Com-
pany, United Fruit Company, Dollar Steamship Lines, San Fran-
cc.isco Stevedoring Company, American-Hawaiian Steamship Com-
pany, Matson Navigation Company, McCormick Steamship Com-
pany, Union Steam Ship Company of New Zealand; Ltd., Nelson
Steamship Company, Ocean Terminals, Inc., Pacific Steamship Lines,
Pacific Oriental Terminals Company, Grace Line, Bay Cities Trans-
portation Company, Williams Dimond & Company, Sudden & Chris-
tenson, and Kingsley Company of California. The National Labor
Relations Board on May 22, 1936, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c)
of the Act and Article III, Section 3 of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, authorized the
Regional Director for the Twentieth Region to conduct investiga-
tions and to provide for appropriate hearings upon due notice.
Pursuant to such authorization, notices of a hearing were duly issued
and served by the Regional Director and on July 15, 16 and 17, 1936,
a joint hearing on all of the petitions was held at San Francisco,
California, before Charles A. Wood, duly designated by the Board
as Trial Examiner. Thereafter, the National Labor Relations Board
issued its Decision and Direction of Election dated August 31, 1936.
Pursuant to the Direction of Election, elections by secret ballot were
conducted by the Regional Director on September 25, 1936, among
the watchmen, baggagemen and porters, storemen, gearmen, linemen,
sliders, janitors and sweepers, inventory clerks, dock and ship oil
pumpers and handymen employed by each of the Companies, includ-
ing all regular employees who were on the payroll immediately pre-
ceding the date of the Direction of Election, whether working or
not on September 25, 1936, and all casual employees who were work-
ing for each of the Companies on September 25, 1936. Thereafter,
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 193
the Regional Director prepared and served upon the parties to the
proceeding an Intermediate Report. On October 20, 1936, the Re-
gional Director issued and duly served upon the parties a Supple-
mentary Intermediate Report. No objections to the ballot, to the
Intermediate Report, or to the Supplementary Intermediate Report
were filed by any of the parties.
The payroll submitted by the American-Hawaiian Steamship Com-,
pany indicated that 55 persons regularly employed by this Company
were eligible to vote. Nineteen of these employees cast ballots.
Seventeen ballots were cast for the Union and two were cast against
the Union. On October 19, 1936, Woodley B. Fitch, president of the
Union, requested that the Board take no action "until the Union has
time to investigate certain circumstances surrounding the Election."
For this reason the Board will take no action at this time on the
petition relating to the employees of this Company.
The payrolls submitted by 'Bay Cities, Transportation Company
and Kingsley Company of California indicated that only one person
in the unit found by the Board to be appropriate was regularly em-
ployed by each of these Companies. At the election no casual em-
ployees claimed to be entitled to vote because employed by these,
Companies on September 25, 1936. In both of these Companies the
one employee indicated his desire to be represented by the Union.
The payroll submitted by, Ocean Terminals, Ltd., indicated that only
one employee eligible to vote was regularly employed by this Com-
pany. One other person claiming to be employed by this Company
as a casual employee on September 25, 1936, voted. Both ballots
were cast for the Union. However the Company challenged the vote
of the casual employee and this vote was disallowed by the Regional
Director. The case of this Company is• therefore the same as that of
the other two.
The National Labor Relations Act creates the duty of employers
to bargain collectively. But the principle of collective bargaining
presupposes that there is more than one. eligible person who desires
to bargain. The Act therefore does not empower the Board to cer-
tify where only one employee is involved. This conclusion does not
mean that a single employee may not designate a representative to
act for him; he had such a right without the Act, and the Act in no
way limits the right. By the same token, this conclusion in no way
limits the protection which the Act otherwise gives such an employee.
At the time of the election the Nelson Steamship Company was not
operating any boats. Four persons claiming to be employed by this
Company were allowed to vote but those votes were subsequently dis-
allowed by the Regional Director upon being challenged by the
Company. No certification is possible as to this Company.
194 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
In the case of each of the other Companies involved in this case,
either a majority of those eligible chose the Union to represent them,
or a majority of those eligible voted and a majority of those voting
chose the Union to represent them. The Board will certify in each
of these cases, relying in the latter situation upon its precedent in
In the Matter of Associated Press, a corporation, and American
Newspaper Guild, Case No. R-26, decided July 3, 1936 (1 N. L. R. B.
686).
Now THEREFORE, 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 8 of Na-
tional Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as
amended,
IT is HEREBY CERTIFIED that Gatemen, Watchmen and Miscellaneous
Waterfront Workers .Union, Local 38-124; International Longshore-
men's,aAssociation has been selected by a majority of the watchmen,
baggagemen and porters, storemen, gearmen, linemen, sliders, jani-
tors and sweepers, inventory clerks, dock and ship oil pumpers and
handymen employed by Luckenbach Steamship Company, Inc., As-
sociated-Banning Company, United Fruit Company, Dollar Steam-
ship Lines, San Francisco Stevedoring Company, Matson Navigation
Company, McCormick Steamship Company, Union Steam Ship Com-
pany of New Zealand, Ltd., Pacific Steamship Lines, Pacific Oriental
Terminals Company, Grace Line, Williams Dimond & Company, and
Sudden & Christenson, respectively, as their representative for the
purposes of collective bargaining with each of the aforementioned
Companies, and that pursuant to Section 9 (a) of the National Labor
Relations Act, Gatemen, Watchmen and Miscellaneous Waterfront
Workers Union, Local 38-124; International Longshoremen's Associ-
ation is the exclusive representative of the watchmen, baggagemen
and porters, storemen, gearmen, linemen, sliders, janitors and sweep-
ers, inventory clerks, dock and ship oil pumpers and handymen em-
ployed by each of the Companies, respectively, for the purposes of
collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of em-
ployment and other conditions of employment.
The petitions to certify representatives of employees of the Nelson
Steamship Company, Ocean Terminals, Inc., Bay Cities Transporta-
tion Company and Kingsley Company of California are hereby
denied.