San Juan Commercial Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 10, 1955

111 N.L.R.B. 599 (N.L.R.B. 1955)

SAN JUAN COMMERCIAL COMPANY 599
SAN JUAN COMMERCIAL COMPANY and UNION DE EMPLEADOS DR
MUELLES DE P. R., LOCAL 24927, AFL, PETITIONER
SAN JUAN MERCANTILE CORPORATION and UNION DR EMPLEADOS DE
MUELLES DE P. R., LOCAL 24927, AFL, PETITIONER. Cases Nos. 2i1-
RC-733 and 24-RC-734. February 10, 1955
Decision and Direction of Elections
Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the Na-'
tional Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before
Vincent M. Rotolo, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made
at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds :
1. The Employers 1 are engaged in commerce within the meaning
of the Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employers.
3, Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the representation
of employees of the Employers within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1)
and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
The Intervenor contends that its contracts covering the checkers
sought herein are a bar. The Employers take no position on the con-
tract bar issue.
Bargaining History of San Juan Mercantile Corporation
On October 24, 1950, the International Longshoremen's Association,
District Council of the Ports of Puerto Rico, Intervenor herein,' and
the Puerto Rico Steamship Association entered into a collective-bar-
gaining agreement covering stevedores and checkers employed by the
members of the Association. Mercantile was a member of the Associa-
tion at the time. The contract was signed by the District Council and
the various Locals of the Intervenor, including Local 1575, delegated
to represent, among others, Mercantile's stevedores, and Local 1674,
representing, among others, Mercantile's checkers. On March 6, 1952,
this agreement was amended and extended to December 31, 1953.
Thereafter, Mercantile withdrew from membership in the Puerto Rico
Steamship Association, but the parties continued to operate under the
bargaining agreement.
On October 5, 1953, the Intervenor, on behalf of Local 1575 and
Local 1674,3 proposed to Mercantile by letter that the existing collec-
1 San Juan Commercial Company is hereinafter described as "Commercial " and San
Juan Mercantile Corporation is hereinafter described as "Mercantile."
2 The Intervenor also entered an appearance on behalf of its Local 1575.
' Although the letter appears to indicate that the District Council would administer
the contract , the record shows that the letter was sent on behalf of Local 1575 and Local
1674.
111 NLRB No. 99.
600 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tive-bargaining agreement be extended to December 31, 1955, but that
the economic clauses of the contract be left open for further discussion.
On October 28, 1953, the Petitioner notified Mercantile by letter that
the Employer's clerks and maintenance employees had designated it
as their bargaining agent and that it would submit, at a later date, a
proposed draft of a collective-bargaining agreement for 1954.4 On
December 31, 1953, the Employer and the Intervenor extended certain
articles of the existing agreement to January 30, 1954; and on Febru-
ary 2, 1954, the parties entered into a stipulation agreement extending
the 1950 collective-bargaining agreement, except for salary and social
benefit clauses, to December 31,1955 .' The stipulation agreement also
provided in pertinent part :
In view of the existing situation on account of the Elections con-
ducted on January 26, 1954, the result of which I. L. A. has ob-
jected, the parties agree that at the termination of the controversy
existing between this organization and U. T. M. because of said
elections by means of the pertinent legal procedures and the final
decision of the competent Authority under the Act, the San Juan
Mercantile Corporation will be free at its discretion to sign a
contract with the entity it deems more convenient to its interests.
The Intervenor and Mercantile disagree as to the reasons why the fore-
going clause was included in the stipulation agreement. The Inter-
venor contends that the clause was added because it had challenged
the result of an election conducted by the Board in the case of Bull
Insular Line, Inc., et al., 108 NLRB 900, and the parties entertained
doubt as to whether or not the Board would order a new election and
include the employees of Mercantile as urged by the Intervenor in its
objections to the election.6 On the other hand, Mercantile contends
that the quoted clause was included, in part, because it wanted to main-
tain a neutral position between the Petitioner and the Intervenor and
the Petitioner had notified it by the letter of October 28, 1953, that it
represented the checkers.
Bargaining History of San Juan Commercial Company
Commercial and the Intervenor, with its affiliated Locals, executed a
collective-bargaining agreement on April 20, 1951. This agreement
covered Commercial's stevedores and the checkers, represented by
4It does not appear that the Petitioner did in fact submit the proposed draft nor did
it file its petition until May 25, 1954.
s The salary and social benefit clauses were to be negotiated at a later date when other
local steamship companies have reached agreement on such clauses . At the time of the
hearing , Mercantile and the Intervenor had not negotiated such provisions
0 In that proceeding , the Board had directed separate elections for the stevedores and
the checkers of members of the Puerto Rico Steamship Association , and the Regional Di-
rector had excluded the employees of Mercantile because it had resigned from the Puerto
Rico Steamship Association.
SAN JUAN COMMERCIAL COMPANY 601
Local 1575 and Local 1674, respectively. Both of these Locals-
ap-proved the agreement. Thereafter, the agreement was modified and
extended to December 31, 1953. In December 1953, the Intervenor
notified Commercial of its desire to extend the existing collective-
bargaining agreement, and on January 4, 1954, the parties executed
an agreement to extend the 1951 contract to December 31,1955?
Status of Local 1674, International Longshoremen's Association
Local 1674 was established to represent clerks and maintenance em-
ployees, including the timekeepers, office workers, paymasters, and
checkers in the Port of San Juan. In addition, sublocals of 1674 rep-
resented such employees in other ports. The membership of this Local
was made up, in part, of approximately 260 employees of the members
of the Puerto Rico Steamship Association,8 and the two Employers
herein involved.
The record shows that on or about September 5, 1953, there was
dissension among the membership of Local 1674,° and after Septem-
ber 23, 1953, when the International Longshoremen's Association was
expelled from the American Federation of Labor, there was a differ-
ence of opinion among the members of Local 1674 concerning the
affiliation of the District Council with the International Longshore-
men's Association. Thereafter, Local 1674 called a general member-
ship meeting for October 24, 1953, but this meeting was suspended be-
cause of the absence of a quorum. The last general membership meet-
ing of Local 1674 was held on June 28, 1953, and its executive board
has not met since September 5, 1953. Further dissension occurred
within the Local during December 1953, after the Board ordered an
election among the checkers in related classifications, employed by
members of the Puerto Rico Steamship Association in the Bull Insu-
lar Line case, and many members, including the Local's delegate to
the District Council, campaigned for the Petitioner.1° Although Local
1674 had a complete list of officers and executive board members prior
to January 26, 1954, after the election described above, all of the
Local's officers joined the Petitioner, and by February 1954, Local
1674 was entirely inactive." On March 14, 1954, the Intervenor met
and adopted a resolution giving the representation of the checkers, em-
7 Although the Intervenor 's local unions did not sign the January 4 agreement, the agree-
ment provided that neither the Intervenor or its Vocals would request higher salaries or
social benefits than other steamship companies agreed to pay in their respective collective.
bargaining contracts.-
8 Approximately 170 members were employed by various companies within the Asso-
ciation.
o It appears that after August 1953 members started defaulting on their dues.
to The Petitioner and the Intervenor appeared on the ballot in that proceeding, and
the Petitioner was thereafter certified as collective -bargaining representative for checkers
and related classifications.
11 Only 21 members who were maintenance workers employed by the Waterman Line
paid their dues in February and no members paid dues in March.
602 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ployed by the two Employers here involved, and who were formerly
represented by Local 1674, to Local 1575. The Intervenor did not
notify the Employers involved herein of this action.
During February 1954, substantially all of the checkers employed
by Commercial notified it that they intended to or had joined the Peti-
tioner, and on April 8, they formally notified Commercial, by letter,
to discontinue the checkoff of dues in the Intervenor. On May 25,
1954, the Petitioner notified Commercial that it represented all of its
checkers and requested a collective-bargaining meeting. The petition
in Case No. 24-RC-733 was also filed on May 25,1954.
On May 8, 1954, Mercantile notified the Petitioner that its contract
with the Intervenor provided that it could negotiate with the Union
ultimately determined as its employees' collective-bargaining repre-
sentative, but as the definite and final decision of said controversy was
still pending, it intended to act under the contract with the Inter-
venor. The Petitioner filed its petition in Case No. 24-RC-734 on
May 25, 1954, seeking to represent Mercantile's checkers. Thereafter,
on or about June 3, 1954, Mercantile.received a copy of a resolution
adopted by its checkers repudiating the agreement with the Intervenor
and authorizing the Petitioner to represent them.
We have carefully considered the facts presented in these cases and
conclude that in view of the circumstances surrounding the contracts
between the Employers and the Intervenor, these contracts no longer
stabilize industrial relations. Under all the circumstances of these
cases, including the fact that considerable dissension existed in Local
1674, arising, in part, because of the expulsion of the International
Longshoremen's Association from the AFL, the fact that Local 1674
is no longer in existence, and the additional fact that the contract be-
tween the Intervenor and Mercantile appears to be in the nature of an
interim agreement, we find that an immediate election is warranted.
Accordingly, we find that the current contracts between the Employ-
ers and the Intervenor do not bar these proceedings.
We find that questions affecting commerce exist concerning the rep-
resentation of employees of the Employers within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate units :
In accordance with the agreement between the parties, we find that
the following constitute units appropriate for purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
(A) All delivery clerks, receiving clerks, tally clerks, and gatemen
of the San Juan Mercantile Corporation working at the Port of San
Juan, excluding all other employees, executives, professional em-
ployees, guards, the paymaster, and other supervisors within the
meaning of the Act.
CIBA STATES LIMITED 603
(B) All employees of the San Juan Commercial Company, em-
ployed at the Army terminal in Catano, Puerto Rico, engaged in the
checking of cargo being loaded or unloaded at said Army terminal,
excluding all other employees, executives, professional employees,
guards, paymaster, and all supervisors within the meaning of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
CIBA STATES LIMITED and LOCAL UNION # 532 OF LEAD BURNERS JOINT
COUNCIL OF UNITED ASSOCIATION OF JOURNEYMEN AND APPRENTICES
OF THE PLUMBING AND PIPE FITTING INDUSTRY OF UNITED STATES
AND CANADA, AFL, PETITIONER. Case No. 4-RC-2472. February
10,1955
Supplemental Decision and Direction
Pursuant to the Decision and Direction of Election issued herein on
November 5, 1954,1 an election was conducted on December 3, 1954,
under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the
Fourth Region, among the employees in the unit heretofore found ap-
propriate. At the close of the election, a tally of ballots was furnished
each of the parties in accordance with the Board's Rules and Regula-
tions. The tally shows that 2 valid ballots were cast for the Petitioner,
no ballots were cast for the Intervenor, Toms River Chemical Em-
ployees Union, no ballots were cast against the participating labor
organizations, 3 ballots were challenged, and no ballots were void. No
objections to the election were filed within the time provided therefor.
As the challenged ballots were sufficient in number to affect the re-
sults of the election, the Regional Director, acting pursuant to the
Board's Rules and Regulations, investigated the issues raised by the
challenges, and on December 17,1954, issued his report and recommen-
dations on challenges. The Regional Director recommended that the
challenge to 1 ballot be sustained, that the challenges to 2 ballots be
overruled, and that the Board amend its appropriate unit finding.
On December 30, 1954, the Petitioner filed exceptions to the Regional
Director's report.
The Board has considered the Regional Director's report, the excep-
tions, and the entire record in the case and hereby adopts the findings,
conclusions, and recommendations of the Regional Director except
insofar as they are inconsistent herewith.
1. In the absence of any exception thereto, we adopt the Regional
Director's recommendation that the challenge to the ballot of James
Conklin be sustained.
1 Not reported in printed volume of Board Decisions and Orders.
111 NLRB No. 98.