Sea Beaver Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 26, 1954

107 N.L.R.B. 1404 (N.L.R.B. 1954)

1404 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
customary multiemployer basis, both local branches of Webb
Coal Company , including the Employer , were represented by
the district supervisor . Although the manager of the Employer
signed the resultant contract for his branch , 3 he attended none of
the negotiations.,
On these facts , and on the record as a whole, we find the
pattern of bargaining described above controlling in determining
the appropriate unit in this proceeding . We therefore find a
unit limited to the employees of the Employer too limited in
scope and consequently inappropriate .' Accordingly , we shall
dismiss the petition.6
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
Member Rodgers took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.
3The manager testified that when the Intervenor's representative presented him with the
contract for signature and informed him that it had been approved by the Webb Coal Company's
Port Huron office, the manager telephoned his district supervisor and "asked him if it was
all right if I read the contract through before I signed it," because "I had not attended the
labor negotiations and wasn't exactly fully informed as to the exact text of the contract."
4 The manager testified that he was present during negotiations of the preceding contract,
but "I did not say a word in the whole proceedings."
5 Des Moines Packing Company, 106 NLRB 206.
61n view of our disposition of this issue, we find it unnecessary to rule on the propriety
of the Employer's role in the filing of the petition, or on the question of contract bar.
SEA BEAVER CORPORATION and INDUSTRIAL UNION OF
MARINE AND SHIPBUILDING WORKERS OF AMERICA, CIO,
Petitioner. Case No. 2-RC-6308. February 26, 1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 ( c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Louis A.
Schneider , 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 this case , the Board finds:
1. The Employer , a Delaware corporation withits sole place
of business in Greenwich , Connecticut , is engaged in the
manufacture and repair of boats and the manufacture of
special wood containers . Since January 1952 , the Employer
has been engaged primarily in the construction of minesweepers
and personnel boats under contract withthe United States Navy.
This contract , in the amount of $ 798,000 , exclusive of certain
Government -furnished supplies , is to be completed sometime
in 1954 . In 1953 the Employer received progress payments of
about 25-35 percent of the value of the contract.
The Employer also shipped material valued at $10,000 to
Wright Aeronautical Corp. in New Jersey, delivered to New
107 NLRB No 280
C & D BATTERIES, INC. 1405
Jersey 2 boats valued at $4,200 each, and delivered at its
plant a $ 7,000 boat to Isbrandtsen lines.
The Employer moved that the petition be dismissed on the
grounds that its operations are essentially local and that it would
not effectuate the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction over it.
Upon the foregoing facts, we find that the Employer's
operations affect commerce within the meaning of the Act. As
the Employer is engaged in the manufacture of vessels for
the United States Navy , its operations have a substantial
effect upon the national defense program . Accordingly, we shall
assert jurisdiction herein.'
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent
certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the
representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. We find that the following employees of the Employer
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section , 9 (b) of the Act:
All production and maintenance employees of the Employer at
its Greenwich, Connecticut, plant, excluding office and plant
clerical employees , professional employees, guards, watchmen,
and supervisors as defined in the Act.'
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
1 Westport Moving and Storage Company, Crate Making Division, 91 NLRB 902. Brady
Aviation Corporation, 104 NLRB 220.
In concluding that the Employer's operations have a sufficiently substantial effect upon
the national defense to warrant exercise of the Board's jurisdiction, Chairman Farmer
and Member Rodgers rely largely upon the fact that the Employer is a direct manufacturer
and supplier, for the United States Navy, of defense materiel. Cf. McArthur Jersey Farm Dairy,
107 NLRB 885.
2 The parties agree that this unit is appropriate, but differ as to the placement of Walter
Jackowski whom the Petitioner would exclude as a supervisor and the Employer would
include. The record indicates that Jackowski exercises none of the indicia of supervisory
authority set forth in the Act. Accordingly, we shall include him in the unit.
C & D BATTERIES, INC. and DISTRICT NO. 1, INTERNA-
TIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, AFL,' Petitidner
and UNITED E L E. C T R I C A L, RADIO AND MACHINE
WORKERS OF AMERICA AND ITS LOCAL 110.2 Case No.
4-RC-2191. February 26, 1954
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before William
'Herein called IAM.
2 Herein called UE and Local 110. International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine
Workers, CIO, herein called IUE, was permitted to intervene at the hearing on the basis
of a showing of interest among the employees sought.
107 NLRB No. 261.
337593 0 - 55 - 90