Nicholson Transit Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 29, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 955 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of NICHOLSON TRANSIT COMPANY, EMPLOYER and SEA-
FARERS INTERNATIONAL UNION OF NORTH AMERICA, AFL, GREAT
LAKES DISTRICT, PETITIONER
Case No. 7-RC-419.-Decided August 09, 1919
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Harold L.
Hudson, 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 National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Reynolds and Gray].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit consisting of all unli-
censed personnel employed on the vessels Sultana, Sonora, Penobscot,
and Mataafa, operated by the Employer, excluding all licensed per-
sonnel and supervisors as defined in the Act. The Intervenor con-
tends that the appropriate unit should not be limited to the four
vessels designated in the petition, but should be coextensive with all
vessels operated by the Employer. The Intervenor, however, is will-
ing to exclude unlicensed personnel employed on the vessel J. P. Wells
who are presently represented by the Petitioner. The Employer takes
no position with respect to the scope of the appropriate unit, but would
exclude stewards on the ground that they are supervisors.
'The hearing officer properly granted the motion of the National Maritime Union, CIO,
herein called the Intervenor , to intervene.
The motions of the Petitioner and the Intervenor for oral argument are denied as the
issues and the positions of the parties are sufficiently clear upon the record.
85 N. L. R. B., No. 168.
955
956 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Employer is a maritime shipping corporation whose vessels
transport automobiles, grain, steel, iron ore, and other bulk products
on the Great Lakes. It operates 15 vessels in the course of this traffic
of which 13 are owned outright by the Employer and one, the Mataafa,
by a wholly owned subsidiary of the Employer. In addition, 1 vessel,
the J. P. Wells, is owned by an independent corporation and is oper-
ated by the Employer under the terms of bare-boat charter 2
In 1941 the Intervenor was recognized as representative of the unli-
censed personnel on board all 9 vessels then owned by the Employer.
By the terms of a contract entered into in 1943 the Intervenor was
recognized as the representative of unlicensed personnel on all vessels
owned or chartered by the Employer. In 1946, however, a new con-
tract was executed, providing that the Intervenor was the representa-
tive of unlicensed personnel on 10 specifically named vessels. Pre-
viously thereto the Employer had taken over the operation of the
vessels Mataa f a and J. P. Wells, which were excluded from the cover-
age of the 1946 contract. The last bargaining contract between the
Employer and the Intervenor, executed in August 1948, was a supple-
ment to the 1946 contract, and made no change in the Intervenor's
status as the representative of unlicensed personnel on the 10 vessels
named in that contract. Before the execution of the 1948 supplement
the Employer had acquired ownership of the vessels Sultana, Sonora,
and Penobscot. At the time of the transfer of operation of the J. P.
Wells to the Employer the Petitioner was the bargaining representa-
tive of the unlicensed personnel on that vessel under a contract with
its owner. The Employer honored this contract and subsequently
entered into bargaining agreements in which it continues to recog-
nize the Petitioner as representative of these employees. The unli-
censed personnel on board the vessels designated in the present peti-
tion have never been represented by any labor organization.
All of the Employer's vessels sail the same waters and load and
discharge their cargoes at the same docks. Wages, overtime rates,
and vacation benefits for unlicensed personnel on the Sultana, Sonora,
and Mataa f a are similar to those for the unlicensed personnel repre-
sented by the Intervenor.3 However, wage schedules and their
methods of computation for the J. P. Wells personnel differ from
those pertaining to the Employer's other vessels.4 Hiring procedures
for the four vessels herein involved also differ from those in effect for
Under these terms personnel on board this vessel are employees of the Employer.
There is no evidence in the record concerning terms for the Penobscot personnel.
The Intervenor concedes that the terms of the Petitioner's contract for the J. P.
Wells personnel are distinct from those of its own contract and that those terms probably
conform to the pattern of bargaining as conducted between the Petitioner and the Detroit
and Cleveland Navigation Company, the owner of the J. P. Wells, before the chartering
of this vessel to the Employer.
NICHOLSON TRANSIT COMPANY 957
the Employer's other vessels. No evidence appears in the record
showing any degree of interdependence or integration in the opera-
tion of the Employer's vessels, nor is there any interchange or contact
between the unlicensed personnel on these vessels.
Under the foregoing circumstances, including the bargaining his-
tory, we find, contrary to the Intervenor's contention, that there is
not a sufficient community of interest among the unlicensed personnel
on the Employer's vessels to warrant our holding that only a unit
coextensive with all the Employer's vessels is appropriate. We be-
lieve that the unlicensed personnel on board each vessel involved
herein may appropriately constitute a separate unit .5 We also believe
that the unlicensed personnel on each of these vessels may appro-
priately be represented in a unit together with the unlicensed person-
nel on board the 10 vessels presently represented by the Intervenor.
We shall not, therefore, make any final determination at this time of
the appropriate unit, but shall first ascertain the desires of these
employees as expressed in the elections hereinafter directed.
There remains for consideration the status of the stewards. There
is one steward, sometimes referred to as cook, on each vessel. He
is in charge of the galley and is responsible for the preparation of
meals, purchasing of supplies, has charge of the linen, sees that rooms:
are kept clean, and that the crew is well fed and receives good care..
In addition to the steward there are in the galley a second cook, and
two porters or utility men. There is also a night cook on the Mataafa_
Although the steward's authority to hire and discharge these em-
ployees is disputed, it is uncontroverted that they serve directly under
him and receive their orders from him. The steward also keeps their
time and submits recommendations for overtime payments in the same
manner as other supervisors on board each vessel. We find that
stewards are supervisors within the meaning of the Act and shall
exclude them from the appropriate unit.°
We shall direct that elections by secret ballot be held among the
following groups of the Employer's employees :
(a) All unlicensed personnel on the vessel Sultana excluding all
licensed personnel, stewards, and all other supervisors as defined in
the Act.
(b) All unlicensed personnel on the vessel Sonora excluding all
licensed personnel, stewards, and all other supervisors as defined in
the Act.
5 See Matter of American Steel and Wire Company of New Jersey, 63 N. L. R. B. 1244.
6 Matter of Cities Service Oil Co. of Pennsylvania (Marine Division), 80 N. L. R. B.
1512; Matter of M. A. Hanna Company, 75 N. L . R. B. 185; Matter of Wilson Transit Com-
pany, 75 N. L. R. B. 181.
958 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
(c) All unlicensed personnel on the vessel Penobscot excluding all
licensed personnel, stewards, and all other supervisors as defined in
the Act.
(d) All unlicensed personnel on the vessel 1llataafa excluding all
licensed personnel, stewards, and all other supervisors as defined in
the Act.
If in these elections the employees in any of the above voting groups
select the Intervenor they will be taken to have indicated a desire to
be added to the bargaining unit presently represented by the
Intervenor.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 7
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days
from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision
of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard,
and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the voting
groups described in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed
(luring the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Di-
rection of Election, including employees who did not work during said
pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid
off, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been dis-
,eharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the
date of the election, and also excluding employees on strike who are
not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether they desire to be
represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Seafarers Inter-
national Union of North America, AFL, Great Lakes District, or by
National Maritime Union, CIO, or by neither.
The compliance status of the Petitioner has lapsed since the hearing in this matter.
The Regional Director is herewith instructed to delete the Petitioner from the ballot in the
election directed herein if the Petitioner has not, within 2 weeks from this date , renewed
its compliance with Section 9 (f), (g), and ( h). No election shall be scheduled within the
2-week period allowed until and unless compliance has been determined.