Pennsylvania & Lake Erie Dock Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 6, 1939

17 N.L.R.B. 372 (N.L.R.B. 1939)

In the Matter of PENNSYLVANIA & LAKE ERIE DOCK Co. and UNITED
DOCK WORKERS LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION No. 982 (C_I O)
Case No. B-1584.-Decided November 6, 1939
Shipping Industry-Investigation of Representatives : controversy concerning
representation of employees : employer 's refusal to grant recognition of union
as exclusive bargaining representative ; bargaining on basis of recognition of
union for members only, no bar to investigation of representatives-Unit Appro-
priate for Collective Bargaining : hourly paid employees of Company at its docks
in Fairport Harbor, excluding foremen, subforemen , supervisors , clerical
employees , and watchmen ; no controversy as to-Election Ordered
Mr. Max W. Johnstone, for the Board.
Mr. John C. Bane, Jr., of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Company.
Mr. A. E. Stevenson, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Union.
Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On August 10, 1939, United Dock Workers Local Industrial Union
#982, herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for
the Eighth Region (Cleveland, Ohio) a petition alleging that a ques-
tion affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of
employees of Pennsylvania & Lake Erie Dock Co., Conneaut, Ohio,
herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and cer-
tification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On October
24, 1939, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board,
acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section
3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series
2, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to
conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice.
On October 24, 1939, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear-
ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and upon
the Union. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on October 27
and 30, 1939, at Cleveland, Ohio, before Peter Ward, the Trial Exam-
17 N. L. R. B., No. 21.
372
PENNSYLVANIA & LAKE ERIE DOCK COMPANY 373
iner duly designated. by the Board. The Board and the Company
were represented by counsel, and the Union by its representative ; all
participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine
and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on
the issues was afforded all parties. At the commencement of the
hearing, counsel for the Company entered a special appearance and
filed .a motion to dismiss the petition for lack of a question concerning
representation. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling thereon. The
motion is hereby denied for the reasons stated in Section III, infra.
During the course of the hearing, the Trial Examiner made several
rulings on other motions and on objections to the admission of evi-
dence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner
and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings
are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Company, a subsidiary of the United States Steel Corporation,
maintains docks at Fairport Harbor, Ohio, for the unloading of iron
ore from ships.
The Company handles approximately 1,000,000 tons of iron ore
annually at Fairport Harbor, all of which is shipped to Fairport
Harbor from ports in the States of Minnesota and Wisconsin. The
Company admits the jurisdiction of the Board.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
United Dock Workers Local Industrial Union #982 is a labor
organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
admitting to membership the hourly paid dock employees of the
Company at Fairport Harbor. .
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On July 22, 1939, the Union requested the Company to negotiate
with it for the purposes of collective bargaining. At a conference
held on August 21, 1939, the Union claimed to represent a majority of
the hourly paid dock employees and presented a proposed contract to
the Company providing for exclusive recognition of the Union. The
several sections of the contract were discussed but the Company re-
fused to recognize the Union as the bargaining representative for any
employees except union members. The parties again met on Septem-
ber 2 and 13, 1939, for the purposes of discussing the union proposal.
The Company. reiterated its position at these meetings that it would
not grant exclusive recognition to the Union.
374 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Company contends that there is no present question concerning
representation because the parties, subsequent to the filing of the
petition herein, engaged in bargaining conferences. This contention
is without merit."
We find that, a question has arisen concerning representation of
employees of the Company.
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON
COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company
described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial
relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among, the several States and
tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce
and the free flow of commerce.
V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Company and the Union agreed at the hearing that the
appropriate unit should consist of all the hourly paid employees of
the-Company at its docks in Fairport Harbor, excluding foremen,
subforemen, supervisors, clerical employees, and watchmen. We see
no reason to deviate from the desires of the parties.
We find that the hourly paid employees of the Company at its
docks in Fairport Harbor, excluding foremen, subforemen, super-
visors, clerical employees, and watchmen, constitute a unit appro-
priate for the purpose of collective bargaining and that said unit
will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their
right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise
effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
Although the Union claimed substantial membership among the
hourly paid dock employees, it agreed that an election by secret ballot
is necessary to resolve the question concerning representation.
The parties agreed at the hearing that the.employees in the appro-
priate unit who are on the pay roll immediately preceding the date of
the election should be eligible to vote. We see no reason to depart
from the desires of the parties. We find that those eligible to vote
in the election shall be the employees in the appropriate unit who are
employed by the Company during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of the election, hereinafter to be directed, including
1 Cf. Matter of American Cyanamid and Chemical Corporation and Local 12119, Gas Coke
and Chemical Worker ., Union District No . 50, United Mine Workers of. America, 11 N. L.
R. B. 803.
PENNSYLVANIA & LAKE ERIE DOCK COMPANY 375
employees who do not world during such pay-roll period because they
may be ill, on vacation , or temporarily laid off , but excluding
employees who will have since quit or been discharged for cause.
On the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record
in the case , the Board makes the following:
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of Pennsylvania & Lake Erie Dock Co., Con-
neaut, Ohio, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6)
and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The hourly paid employees of the Company at its docks in Fair-
port Harbor, excluding foremen, subforemen , supervisors , clerical
employees , and watchmen, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining , within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the National Labor Relations Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
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 , and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board
to.; asc ertairL representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining
with Pennsylvania & Lake Erie Dock Co., Conneaut , Ohio, an election
by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible but not later
than thirty ( 30) days from the date of this Direction , under the
direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eighth
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and
Regulations , among the hourly paid employees of the Company at its
docks in Fairport Harbor, who are employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of the election , including
employees who do not work during such pay-roll period because they
may be ill, on vacation , or temporarily laid off, but excluding fore-
men, subforemen , supervisors , clerical employees , watchmen, and
employees who will have since quit or been discharged for cause, to
determine whether or not they desire to be represented by United
Dock Workers Local Industrial Union #982, affiliated with the
Congress of Industrial Organizations , for the purposes of collective
bargaining.
247354-40=vol. 17-25