Todd-Johnson Dry Docks, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 15, 1942

42 N.L.R.B. 489 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Mattel of TODD-JOHNSON DRY DOCKS, INC and INDUSTRIAL
UNION OF MARINE AND SHIPBUILDING WORKERS OF AMERICA, LOCI,AL
No 29, AFFILIATED WITH CONGRESS OF INDUSTRIAL ORGANIZATIONS
Case No. R-3975 -Decided July 15, 194
Jurisdiction Ship repairing industry
Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question stipu-
lation that question arose by season of fact that Company denied the appro-
priateness of the unit sought, election necessary 0,
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining all guards and watchmen, excluding
the major, the captain, lieutenants, sergeants, fire guards, and messengers
Definitions - guards held to be employees within the meaning of Section 2 (3)
of the Act
Messrs J R Monroe, J N. Pharr, and George S. Norman, of New
Orleans, La., for the Company.
Mr. George Goodenow, of Mobile, Ala, and Mr Philip A. Comeauai,
of Algiers, La, for the Industrial
Mr David Karasick, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petition duly filed by Industrial Union of Mai me and Ship-
building Workers of America, Local No 29, affiliated with Congress
of Industrial Organizations, herein called the Industrial, alleging that
a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representa-
tion of employees of Todd-Johnson Dry Docks, Inc, New Orleans,
Louisiana, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations
Board, herein called the Board, provided for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice before Charles A. Kyle, Trial Examiner Said hear-
ing was held at New Orleans, Louisiana, on June 19, 1942. The Com-
pany and the Industrial appeared, participated, and were afforded full
opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to introduce evidence beating on the issues. The Trial Examiner's
rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are
hereby affirmed
42 N L R B, No 101
489
490 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On July 6, 1942 , the Company filed a brief which the Board has
duly considered
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following-
FINDINGS OF FACT
I THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Todd-Johnson Dry Docks, Inc , is a Delaware corporation with its
offices, shipyards, and dry docks located on the Mississippi River at
New Orleans, Louisiana It is engaged in the dry dock and iepair of
"vessels of all flags in foreign and coast-wide trade, and boats and
barges in rivei and inland water trade, as well as harbor craft and
Government-owned vessels " The Company operates two plants or
'yards, some six miles apart, called "upper plant" and "lower plant "
The two yards operate as one unit, the men being hired in the same
place and the workmen being interchanged. During the year 1940 the
Company purchased raw materials valued in excess of $500,000, all of
which raw materials originated outside the State of Louisiana with the
exception of some minor amounts of lumber Its total volume of busi-
ness in 1940 was in excess of $4,000,0001 Both the gross receipts and
the amount and value of raw materials purchased during the year 1941
were in excess of the gross ieceipts and amount and value of raw ma-
terials purchased during the year 1940 Over 90 percent of the Com-
pany's business is at the present time connected directly with the war
effort
II THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of Ameiica,-
Local No 29, affiliated with Congress of Industrial Organizations, i6
a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Com-
pany -
III THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The parties stipulated at the hearing that a question concerning
representation had arisen by reason of the fact that the Company
denies that the unit sought by the Industrial is appropriate.
A statement by the Trial Examiner at the hearing indicates that the
Industrial represents a substantial number of employees in the unit
hereinafter found to be appropriate 2
1 The above stated facts conceinmg the business operations of the Company are as set
forth in Matter of Todd-Johnson Dry Docks, Inc, and American Federation of Labor et at,
34 N L It B 736, in accordance with a stipulation of the parties in the present case
that the business operations of the Company are substantially the same as set forth in the
Board s findings of fact in the cited decision
2 The Trial Examiner stated at the hearing that the Industrial had submitted to him 45
membership application cards, of which 41 bore the names of persons listed on the Com-
TODD-JOHNSON,DRY DOCKS, INC 491
We find that a question has arisen concerning iepresentation of
employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and
Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Industrial alleges that all guards and watchmen of the Com-
pany constitute an appropriate unit The Company contends that
such a unit is inappropriate on the ground that watchmen are repre-
sentatives of the management
At the time of the hearing the Company employed 75 guards,
including the captain, three lieutenants, and fout sergeants These
men are listed on a separate pay roll A year ago the Company
employed 24 or 25 guards who at that time were called watchmen
The guards are organized on semi-military lines The plant-produc-
tion manager of the Company, a major in the United States Army
Reserves, is the head of the organization He is responsible only to
the general manager and secretary and treasurer of the Company,
next in line come the captain, the three lieutenants, and the four
sergeants The regular guards on the force must receive the approval
of the major before they can be hired They need no special qualifica-
tions but must be American citizens. Guards have been chosen' both
from regular employees of the Company and from outside sources,
preference generally being given to former service men Guards are
supplied with uniforms by the Company as well as either shotguns
or sidearms which they carry while on duty The guards work on
three shifts of 8 hours each The duties of the guards include check-
ing and identifying employees and all other persons who enter and
leave the yards, checking and examining all articles and materials
delivered to and taken from the yards; maintaining records of the
visitors and vehicles entering the yards; reporting the arrival and
departure of all ships; directing traffic, and supervising the parking
of automobiles on Company parking lots; and patroling the various
sections of the Company's properties to which they are assigned as
their post of duty The guards are placed under bond, the cost of
which is borne by the Company, and are commissioned by the super-
intendent of police of the City of New Orleans
As noted above, the Company contends that the guards are repre-
sentatives of the management rather than employees. We find this
position untenable The relationship between the Company and the
guards is clearly that of employer and employee We find nothing in
the duties of the guards set forth above to warrant depriving them
pany's pay roll of June 16 , 1942, among the employees in the alleged appropriate unit, which
contained the names of 75 guards including the captain , 3 lieutenants , and 4 sergeants
The signatures on all 41 membership application cards appeared to be genuine and the cards
were dated from March 26 through April 22, 1942
492 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of the right of self-organization and collective bargaining guaranteed
employees under the Act 3 We find that guards are employees within
the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act and are entitled to the benefits
of the Act
The Company further contends that the organization of guards for
collective bargaining purposes will lessen their efficiency because their
allegiance would be divided between the Company and the Industrial
The evidence does not support this argument The Act confers upon
employees the right to self-organization and to bargain collectively
through representatives of their own choosing We can see no com-
pelling reason for denying the guards this right
The Industiial wishes the mayor and the captain excluded from the
unit on the ground that each of them excercises supervisory duties and
also because they are paid a regular salary, while the remaining mem-
bers of the guard force are paid on an hourly basis We find that the
major and the captain are supervisory employees and we shall, there-
fore, exclude them from the unit
The Industrial seeks to include, and the Company to exclude, The
three lieutenants and four sergeants The lieutenants and sergeants
inspect and supervise the guards to see that they are properly armed,
dressed, and otherwise performing their duties. Sergeants have
authority to take a guard off duty and to recommend his dismissal for
any breach of discipline or duties. The sergeant's recommendation
of dismissal is made to the appropriate lieutenant, then to the captain,
and is finally passed upon by the major We find that the lieutenants
and the sergeants exercise supervisory authority and are, therefore,
to be excluded from the unit.
Two messengers work out of the dry clock office and are carried on
the guard pay roll They are not considered as part of the guard
system and are carried on the same pay roll as a convenience for the
timekeepers We shall exclude the two messengers in question from
the unit
In addition to the police guards, the Company also engages a force
of fire guards. The fire guards comprise a separate department and
have a captain, chief, and sergeant as does the police guard . We shall
exclude fire guards from the unit hereinafter found to be appropriate.
From the foregoing facts and upon the basis bf the entire record,
we find that all guards and watchmen of the Company, excluding the
8 No question auses in this case as to the propriety of including guards in the same bar-
gaining unit as other employees performing different functions In Matter of Todd -Johnson
Dry Docks , Inc, and Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Won hers of America,
Local No 29, affiliated with Congress of Industrial Organizations , 18 N L R B 973, and
Matter of Todd-Johnson Dry Docks, The, and Aine,ican Federation of Labor et al, 34 N L
Il B 736, watchmen were excluded from a general plant-wide unit of employees of the
Company At the present time, the Industrial holds a contract co%eimg all employees of the
Company with the exception of watchmen and ceitain other classifications
TODD-JOHNSON DRY DOCKS, INC 493
-majol, the captain, lieutenants. sergeants, fire guards, and messengers,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act'
V THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We find that the question concerning Iepresentation which has arisen
can'best be resolved by,an election by secret ballot We shall direct
that the employees of the Company eligible to vote in the election shall
be those employees in the appropriate unit who were employed during
the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of
Election herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in
the Direction
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 Relations Act,
49 Stat 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is
her}el5 i
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board to
ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with
Todd-Johnson Dry Docks, Inc, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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 Fifteenth
Region, acting rn this matte' as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and
Regulations, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in
Section IV, above, who were Employed at the Company's upper plant
and lower plant located at New Orleans, Louisiana, during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, includ-
ing any such employees who did not work during said pay-roll period
because, they, iN ere ill or on vacation or in the active military service
or training of the United Seafes, or temporarily laid off, but excluding
4 See Mattei of John Morrell d Co and Local Union No 1, United Packinghouse Workers
of America, of Packinghouse iioikeis Organizing Committee, affiliated with C I 0,
29 N L R B 1008, Matter of P C A Manufacturing Company, Inc, and United Electrical,
Radio, and Machine Woi kei s of Amer ica, Local 104, 40 N I. R B 668, clatter of Chrysler
Corporation and United Protective IVoikers of Anierica, 36 N L R B 593, Matter of Yel-
loio Truck and Coach Manufacturing Company and United Organization of Plant Protection
Employees, 39 N L R B 14, Matter of Frigidaire Division; Cenral Motois Corpoia
'l`ion , and United Eleetrical,,Radio,,asnd Machine Workers of America (CIO) 39 N L R B
1108, Matter of American Brass Company and International Union of Mine, Mill, and
Smelter Workers, C I 0, 41 N L R B 783, Mattel of Bohn Aluminum if Brass Corpo-
ration and United Protective Hordes of America, Local No 1, 41 N L R B 1012
494 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
any who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine
whether or not they desire to be represented by Industrial Union of
Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America, Local No 29, affiliated
with Congress of Industrial Organizations, for the purposes of collec-_
tive bargaining.
Mr GERARD D REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.