Pacific Tankers, Inc.

In the Matter of PACIFIC TANKERS, INC., EMPLOYER and RADIO OF- FICERS' UNION, MARINE DIVISION, COMMERCIAL TELEGRAPHERS UNION, AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 21-RC-503.-Decided January 26, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Los An- geles, California, on October 22, 1948, before George H. O'Brien, hear- ing officer. At the hearing American Radio Association, CIO, herein called the Intervenor, moved to dismiss the petition on the ground that the present proceeding is barred by an existing contract. For reasons set forth below the motion is denied. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board Members. * Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The labor organizations named herein claim to represent em- ployees of the Employer. 3. The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Petitioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. On January 10, 1948, the Employer entered into a collective bargain- ing agreement with American Communications Association, Marine Department, CIO, such agreement to remain in effect until January 1, 1949, and from year to year thereafter unless notice of a desire to terminate the agreement is given by either party between October 1 and 20 of any calendar year. The Intervenor, claiming to be the legal ` Reynolds, Murdock, and Gray. 81 N. L. R. B., No. 55. 325 326 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD successor of the original contracting union,' urges this contract as a bar with respect to the present proceeding. As the petition herein was filed within a reasonable period in advance of the automatic re- newal clause in the contract, we find, without regard to any other considerations, that the contract is not a bar to a present determina- tion of representatives.2 We find that 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. The following employees of the Employer constitute a unit ap- propriate for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All radio officers employed on ocean-going tankers operated by the Employer, Pacific Tankers, Inc., excluding supervisors and all other employees. 5. The Petitioner contends that the Intervenor should be denied a place on the ballot. The Intervenor relies on its interest as the claimed successor of the contracting union, as justifying its request that its name be placed on the ballot.3 However, without determining what rights, if any, the Intervenor may have received from the contracting union, we shall, in view of the Intervenor's alleged contractual in- terest and colorable claim to representation, accord it a place on the ballot.4 DIRECTION OF ELECTION 5 As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 90 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among 'In support of its claim as legal successor to the original contracting union, the Inter- venor has proffered in evidence a copy of a Consent Decree , No. 378281, entered in the Superior Court of the State of California , in and for the city and county of San Francisco. 2 Matter of Gemeo Engineering and Manufacturing Co , Inc., 76 N L. R. B. 437; Matter of Philadelphia Suburban Transportation Company , 79 N. L. R. B. 448. ' The Intervenor has not submitted any authorization cards to establish a representation interest herein. * Matter of Bull Insular Line, Inc., et al., 63 N. L. R. B. 154. Matter of American Manu- facturing Company, 73 N. L. R. B. 920. Since we find the Intervenor entitled to a place on the ballot because of its colorable claim to representation , it becomes unnecessary to pass upon the propriety of the hearing officer's ruling refusing to allow the Intervenor to present authorization cards as proof of interest at the hearing , as such ruling could not under these circumstances be prejudicial 5 Any participant in the election directed herein may , upon its prompt request to and approval, thereof by the Regional Director , have its name removed from the ballot. PACIFIC TANKERS, INC. 327 the employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and also ex- cluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether they desire to be represented, for purposes of col- lective bargaining, by Radio Officers' Union, Marine Division, Com- mercial Telegraphers Union, AFL, or by American Radio Association, CIO, or by neither.