Robert C. Coleman

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 31, 1969

180 N.L.R.B. 529 (N.L.R.B. 1969)

ROBERT C. COLEMAN, JOHNNY COX, ET AL.
Robert C. Coleman , Johnny Cox, Rodney Gregorio,
Sam Law , James H. Victor and Frank Wilson and
International Longshoremen 's and Warehousemen's
Union , International Longshoremen's and
Warehousemen 's Union , Local No. 18, Tom
Phillips, Dispatcher , Doe One and Doe Two,
Officers of International and Warehousemen's
Union and International and Warehousemen's
Union , Local No. 18, Pacific Maritime
Association , and Port of Sacramento , a Public
Agency. Case AO- 117
December 31, 1969
ADVISORY OPINION
BY CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
FANNING, BROWN, AND JENKINS
On November 19, 1969, Robert C. Coleman,
Johnny Cox, Rodney Gregorio, Sam Law, James H.
Victor, and Frank Wilson, herein called the
Petitioners, filed a petition pursuant to Sections
102.98 and 102.99 of the National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations , Series 8, as amended,
for an Advisory Opinion with respect to the
jurisdictional issue raised by the injunction
proceeding filed by the Petitioners against
defendants International Longshoremen's and
Warehousemen's Union, Local 18, herein called the
Union, the Union's officers, its International, the
Pacific Maritime Association and the Port of
Sacramento. The injunction proceeding, in which the
Petitioners, employees of the Port of Sacramento,
sought to enjoin alleged discriminatory practices by
529
the defendants therein was instituted in the Superior
Court, County of Yolo, State of California, Action
No. 23977 and subsequently was removed to the
United States District Court for the Eastern District
of California.' Only the Union and the Port of
Sacramento filed Responses to the petition. The
Port of Sacramento argues in its Response that as a
public agency of the State of California, it is not
covered by the National Labor Relations Act and
therefore the Board lacks jurisdiction over it. In the
State Court action, the Petitioners conceded that
"the Port of Sacramento is a public agency or body
organized and existing under and by virtue of the
laws of the State of California".
The Board has duly considered the allegations of
the petition and the Responses thereto. The Board's
Advisory Opinion proceedings "are designed
primarily to determine questions of jurisdiction by
application of the Board's discretionary standards to
the `commerce' operations of an employer".' A
basic issue presented herein is whether the Port of
Sacramento, admittedly a California public agency,
is an "employer" within the meaning of Section 2(2)
of the Act or is excluded therefrom as a "political
subdivision" [of the State of California]. As this
issue does not fall within the intendment of the
Board's Advisory Opinion rules, we shall dismiss the
petition herein.'
Accordingly, it is hereby ordered that, for the
reasons above set forth, the petition for an Advisory
Opinion herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
'Thereafter, pursuant to a stipulation , the action was dismissed by the
Federal District Court only as to the Port of Sacramento
'Upper Lakes Shipping Ltd., 138 NLRB 221; Mt Pleasant Public
Utilities , 156 NLRB 79; International Air Service Inc ofSan Juan, Puerto
Rico , 165 NLRB No 65
'Ibid.
180 NLRB No. 79