Star-Kist Samoa Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 7, 1968

172 N.L.R.B. 1467 (N.L.R.B. 1968)

STAR-KIST SAMOA INC.
Star-Kist Samoa Inc. and Construction and General
Laborers ' Union , Local 368 of the Laborers' In-
ternational Union of North America , AFL-CIO,
Petitioner . Case 37-RC-1420
August 7, 1968
DECISION AND ORDER
By CHAIRMAN MCCULLOCH AND MEMBERS
FANNING , JENKINS , AND ZAGORIA
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Hearing Officer Bernard T.
Hopkins . The Employer and Petitioner have filed
briefs in support of their respective positions.
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error . They are hereby af-
firmed.
Upon the entire record in this case , the Board
finds:
Star-Kist Samoa Inc. is a California corporation
doing business only at Pago Pago , American
Samoa , where it is engaged in processing tunafish.
It was stipulated at the hearing that during the fiscal
year ending May 3, 1967, the Employer made sales
in excess of $50,000 to customers outside of Amer-
ican Samoa and purchased goods or services from
outside of American Samoa valued in excess of
$50,000.
The Petitioner seeks to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer at its present operation at
Pago Pago, American Samoa . The Employer moved
that the petition be dismissed on the ground that
the Board does not have jurisdiction over em-
ployers doing business in American Samoa.'
Section 9(c)(I) of the Act provides that the
Board shall direct an election in those cases where
it has determined that ". . . a question of represen-
tation affecting commerce exists ." Section 2(6) of
the Act defines "commerce" as:
trade , traffic , commerce , transportation, or
communication among the several States, or
between the District of Columbia or any Terri-
tory of the United States and any State or
other Territory, or between any foreign
country and any State , Territory, or the Dis-
trict of Columbia , or within the District of
Columbia or any Territory, or between points
in the same State but through any other State
i Alternatively , the Employer urges the Board to exercise its discretion to
decline jurisdiction In view of our disposition of the motion to dismiss for
want of jurisdiction , we do not reach the question of discretion.
' Ronrico Corporation , 53 NLRB 1 137
8 The Virgin Islands Hotel , Inc , 1 10 NLRB 558
1467
or Territory or the District of Columbia or any
foreign country.
The Board has previously interpreted "Territo-
ry," as used in Section 2(6) to include , inter alia,
Puerto Rico ,2 the Virgin Islands ,3 and Guam.'
In Ronrico , supra , the Board concluded that it
had jurisdiction in Puerto Rico , finding that the
courts had invariably interpreted "Territory" (in a
like statutory context ) as meaning only those pos-
sessions endowed with certain characteristics. If
"incorporated " and "organized " it is a "Territory."
"Incorporated " means that the territory has been
declared by statute or treaty to be a part of the
United States . "Organized " refers to congressional
establishment of a system of local self-government.
If the possession is organized but not incorporated
it may still be a "Territory." The determinative fac-
tor in such cases is the intent of Congress in enact-
ing the statute.
The Board most recently construed "Territory"
as used in the Act in determining its applicability to
Guam .5 Although Guam had the same governmen-
tal status as the Virgin Islands , which the Board al-
ready had determined was covered , the organic act
establishing Guam's government provided that no
subsequently enacted statute should apply unless it
referred to Guam by name. While noting that the
organic act specifically referred to Guam as an
unincorporated territory, and that a commission
recommended that the NLRA apply, the Board
found congressional intent in Section 14(c)(2),
wherein Guam is named as a territory which may
assume jurisdiction declined by the Board. Reason-
ing that Congress would not empower the Board
to decline jurisdiction it did not have, the Board
found Guam to be covered by the Act.
In I.C.C. v. U.S. ex rel. Humboldt S.S. Co.,6 the
Supreme Court, in ruling that Alaska was a "terri-
tory," held that the government of a territory need
not meet a sophisticated standard to be an "or-
ganized territory ," that Congress had plenary
power in the territories , and "that the form of
government it shall establish is not prescribed and
may not necessarily be the same in all the territo-
ries."
American Samoa is neither " incorporated" nor
"organized ." It does not have even a rudimentary
government established by Congress , but rather one
established by the executive branch in the person of
the Secretary of the Interior ,7 to whom administra-
tive authority was delegated by the President." It is
4 RCA Communications , Inc , 154 NLRB 34
' Ibid
' 224 U.S 474 at 482.
' S Doc No 38, 87th Cong , 1st. Sess 5
'Exec Order No 10264, 16 Fed Reg 6417 (1951)
172 NLRB No. 161
1468 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
not specifically included as a territory in Section
14(c)(2). Further distinguishing American Samoa
from those dependencies of the United States
which have been found to be "Territories" are the
facts that its inhabitants, while American Nationals,
are not citizens ,9 that it is not within the jurisdiction
of any circuit court, and that it has no Federal dis
trict court.10
Under all of the relevant circumstances , particu-
larly the fact that Congress has not established any
form of self-government for American Samoa, and
in the absence of a clear congressional mandate, we
conclude that American Samoa does not come
within the jurisdiction of the Act. Accordingly, we
shall grant the Employer's motion and dismiss the
petition.
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition filed herein
be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
'8USC 41408(1) 1028USC