Shipowners' Association of The Pacific Coast

In the Matter of SHIPOWNERS' ASSOCIATION OF THE PACIFIC COAST, WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF THE PACIFIC COAST, THE WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS OF SEATTLE, THFJ WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS OF PORTLAND, THE WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO, THE WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA, and INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S AND WAREHOUSE- MEN'S UNION, DISTRICT No. 1 In the Matter Of WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA and INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S AND WAREHOUSE- MEN'S UNION, LOCAL 1-13 Cases Nos. B-638 and R-572, respectively.Decided June 21, 1938 Longshoremen Industry-D+mployer: companies functioning through associa- tions-Investigation of Representatives: controversy concerning representation of employees : controversy concerning appropriate unit ; employer's refusal to grant recognition of union ; necessity for designation of proper collective bar- gaining agency to facilitate negotiations for next contract-period-Contract- Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : workers who do the longshore work in the Pacific Coast ports of the United States for the companies which are members of the employer associations herein involved ; coast-wide ; "em- ployer" unit : meaning of ; history of employer organization : organization of companies on coast basis , functioning of companies with respect to labor rela- tions ; history of collective bargaining relations with employer and in industry : failure -of bargaining attempted on a local scale, successful bargaining on coast basis, present coast-wide agreement ; desires of employees : visiting privileges, absorption of unemployed members ; basic similarity of working rules ; walking bosses excluded ; differences in meaning of subclassifications of longshoremen in various ports-Representatives : proof of choice : comparison of employee lists and union cards-Certification of Representatives: upon proof of majority representation. Mr. Bertram Edises, for the Board. Gladstein, Grossman & Margolis, by Mr. Richard Gladstein and Mr. Aubrey Grossman, of San Francisco, Calif., for I. L. W. U., I. L. W. U. District No. 1, and I. L. W. U. Local 1-13. Mr. Carey McWilliams, of Los Angeles, Calif., for I. L. W. U. Local 1-13. Mr. Charles J. Katz, Mr. John C. Packard, of Los Angeles, Calif., and Mr. W. J. Hull, of Long Beach, Calif., for I. L. A. Local 38-82, Inc.,- 1 Katz and Packard were permitted to represent those interests in I. L. A. Local 38--82, Inc., which they represented in the proceedings in the Superior Court of the State of Cali- fornia, in and for the County of Los Angeles, entitled Walker V. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-82, Inc., Number 420356. Hull was permitted to represent the adverse interests in I. L. A. Local 38-82, Inc. 1002 DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1003 Mr. Gregory Harrison, of San Francisco, Calif., for Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast, and members thereof listed in Ap- pendix "B"; Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, and members thereof listed in Appendix "C"; Waterfront Employers of Seattle, and members thereof listed in Appendix "D"; Waterfront Employers of Portland, and members thereof listed in Appendix "E"; Waterfront Employers 'Association of San Francisco, and mem- bers thereof listed in Appendix "F"; and Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California, and members thereof listed in Appendix "G". • Mr. A. H. Petersen, of Gardena, Calif., for the A. F. of L. Mr. James F. Kennedy and Mr. Lawrence Mallen, of San Francisco, Calif., for I. L. A. Local 38-79. . Mr. Milton D. Sapiro, of San Francisco, Calif., for I. L. A. Local 38-79. Mr. L. B. Sulqrove, of Tacoma, Wash., for I. L. A., I. L. A. Local 38-97, I. L. A. Local 38-89, I. L. A. Local 38-86, and I. L. A. Local 38-83. Mr. Samuel DeG'root, of Los Angeles, Calif., for I. L. A. Local 38-82, Inc. Mr. Joseph L. Searles, of San Francisco, Calif., for I. L. A. Local 38-79. Mr. Martin Kurasch, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES STATEMENT OF THE CASE 4 On January 29, 1938, after a hearing, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, issued a Decision and Order in a proceeding it had entitled Case No. XXI-8-325,2 in which it re- manded the proceedings for purposes of further hearing.3 That pro- ceeding had been based upon a petition filed by International Long- shoremen's and Warehousemen's Union ,4 Local 1-13 alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of longshoremen of Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California in Los Angeles and Long Beach harbor and requesting an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Sec- 2 Upon being transferred to the Board the designation of the case was changed to Case No. R-572 8 4 N. L. It, B. 1199. That Decision contains a detailed statement of the pleadings and proceedings prior thereto . 4 International Longshoremen 's and warehousemen's Union is herein called I L W.'U 1004 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD tion 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On January 10, 1938, I. L. W. U. Local 1-46 filed with the Regional Director for the Twenty-first Region (Los Angeles, California) a. petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con- cerning the representation of longshoremen employed by Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California in the Santa Barbara and Ventura harbor area and requesting an investigation and certifi- cation of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act. This proceeding was entitled Case No. XXI-R-421. On January 19, 1938, 1.--L. W. U., District No. 1, filed with the Regional Director for the Twentieth Region (San Francisco, Cali- fornia) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of workers employed at long- shore work in all the Pacific Coast ports of the United States. This proceeding was entitled Case No. XX-R-196. On January 29, 1938, the Board issued, together with its Decision and Order in Case No. XXI-R-325, an Order Transferring Proceed- ings from the Twenty-first Region to the Twentieth Region, Consoli- dating and Directing Investigation and Hearing, by which Cases Nos. XXI-R-421 and XXI-R-325 were, in accordance with Article II, Section 37 (c), of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, herein called the Rules and Regu- lations, transferred to and continued in the Twentieth Region. The proceedings transferred, and Case No. XX-R-196, were, in accord- ance with Article III, Section 10 (c) (2), of the Rules and Regula- tions, consolidated for purposes of hearing, and the Regional Di- rector for the Twentieth Region was, pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of the Rules and Regulations, ordered to conduct an investigation and to provide for appropriate hearings upon due notice. On February 4, 1938, the Board permitted I. L. W. U. Local 1-46 to withdraw its petition and ordered, in accordance with Article II, Section 37 (c), of the Rules and Regulations, Case No. XXI-R-421 to be severed from Cases Nos. XXI-R-325 and XX-R-196. On February 5, 1938, the Regional Director issued a notice of consolidated hearing, copies of which were served upon the parties." Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held in San Francisco, Cali- fornia, from February 15 through February 25, 1938, inclusive, and on March 25 and 26, 1938; in Los Angeles, California, on March 7, 1938; in San Pedro, California, from March 7, 1938, through March 9, 1938, inclusive; in Seattle, Washington, from March 14 through March 17, 1938, inclusive; and in Portland, Oregon, on March 18 5 A list of the parties served is contained in Appendix "A". DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1005 and 19, 1938, before Walter B. Wilbur, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board, the Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast, and members thereof named in appendix "B", Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, and members thereof listed in appendix "C", Waterfront Employers of Seattle, and members thereof listed in Appendix "D", Waterfront Employers of Portland, and members thereof listed in appendix "E", Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco, and members thereof listed in appendix "F", and Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California, and members thereof listed in appendix "G", I. L. W. U., I. L. W. U. District No. 1, I. L. W. U. Local 1-13, and International Longshoremen's Association 6 Locals 38-97, 38-89, 38-86, and 38-79, were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. A. H. Petersen appeared for the American Federation of Labor, herein called the A. F. of L., James F. Kennedy and Lawrence Mallen ap- peared for I. L. A. Local 38-79. Charles J. Katz and John C. Pack- ard appeared for those interests in I. L. A. Local 38-82, Inc., which were associated with the Committee for Industrial Organization, herein called the C. I. 0., and W. J. Hull appeared for those inter- ests in I. L. A. Local 38-82, Inc., associated with the A. F. of L. Samuel DeGroot made a special appearance for I. L. A. Local 38-82, Inc., for the purpose of contesting the jurisdiction of the Board. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine' and cross-examine witnesses and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. 0 The A. F. of L., I. L. A., and I. L. A. Locals objected to the juris- diction of the Board on the grounds that the existence of a contract between the employers and I. L. A. Pacific Coast District 38 deprived the Board of jurisdiction and that the Board had no power to desig- nate a unit as one appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain- ing, which was larger than the individual employer. The Trial Examiner overruled these objections to the jurisdiction of the Board. The I. L. W. U., I. L. W. U. District No. 1, and the I. L. W. U. Locals sought to introduce testimony as to the structure and formation of the Maritime Federation of the Pacific. Objec- tions to the introduction of this evidence were sustained by the Trial Examiner. During the course of the hearing the Trial Ex- aminer made several other rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were com- mitted. The rulings are hereby affirmed. International Longshoremen 's Association is herein called I. L. A. 1006 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD On April 30, 1938, Gregory Harrison, counsel for the companies and associations, filed a brief with the Board at Washington, D. C. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANIES During the course of the hearing counsel for the Board read into the record the following stipulation : It is hereby stipulated between the National Labor Relations Board and the parties represented here by Mr. Gregory Harri- son as follows : (1) That each individual company here involved, that is to say, each company listed herein as belonging to either the Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, the Waterfront Employers of Seattle, the Waterfront Employers of Portland, the Waterfront Employers Association of San Fran- cisco, or the Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California, is engaged in the transportation or handling of waterborne cargo. Two ; that the longshoremen on whose behalf the petition in this case is filed, handle said waterborne cargo. Three; that more than 50 per cent of said cargo, at the time it is handled by said longshoremen, is in the course of trans- portation between States in the United States, or between the United States and foreign countries, or between the United States and non-contiguous territories or possessions of the United States. The companies which are members of the Waterfront Employers of Seattle, Waterfront Employers of Portland, Waterfront Em- ployers Association of San Francisco, and Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California, herein collectively called the regional associations, are either firms engaged in the transportation of cargo or passengers by water, stevedoring companies or, except in the case of Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco, terminal operators.' The companies which are members of the Shipowners' Association of the Pacific carry lumber from the Northwest ports and are en- gaged in the transportation of cargo in interstate or foreign com- merce. Three members of the Shipowners' Association, Charles H. Higgins Company, Hobbs-Wall & Company, and Los Angeles and '' In the list of members of waterfront Employers of Seattle, Board Exhibit No. 17, The Jordan Company appears under the classification "weigher". DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1007 San Francisco Navigating Company, transport cargo only between ports in the State of California, but the vessels of each of these three companies go outside the 3-mile limit. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union is a labor organization affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organization, admitting to its membership all workers engaged in longshore work. International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, District No. 1, has jurisdiction over the ports in Alaska, Brit- ish Columbia, California, Oregon, Washington, and the Hawaiian Islands; each of its Locals has jurisdiction over one or more ports. International Longshoremen's Association is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to its membership all workers engaged in longshore work. Pacific Coast District International Longshoremen's Association, Local No. 38, has jurisdiction over all the ports of the Pacific Coast north of the Republic of Mexico, and including the territory of Hawaii; each of its Locals has jurisdiction over one or more ports. III. THE HISTORY OF BARGAINING In 1909 the I. L. A. and several independent longshoremen's asso- ciations with which it had been competing in various ports on the Pacific Coast entered into an agreement providing for the establish- ment of Pacific Coast District International Longshoremen's Asso- ciation, Local No. 38, of which all the local longshoremen's unions on the Pacific Coast became a part. The Pacific Coast District was given autonomy with respect to labor relations. No working agree- ment could be entered into by any of its component locals without the approval of the District, and it was agreed that no Local was to be chartered by the I. L. A. without the consent of the District. Between 1909 and 1934 the I. L. A. Pacific Coast District was unable to reach that state of organization which would have enabled it to act effectively as a unit on the Coast. Several local agreements with employers, made by the San Francisco Local and the Tacoma Local, were the total result of collective bargaining efforts. Longshoremen's strikes in San Francisco, in 1916 and 1919, were lost by the longshore- men. After the 1919 strike, the longshoremen, with the exception of the Tacoma Local, were unable to achieve any effective collective bargaining until 1934. In February 1934 the San Francisco Local, opposed to plans to sub- mit demands of the longshoremen to arbitration, called a convention of the I. L. A. Locals in the Pacific Coast District to take action 1008 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD against these arbitration plans. The convention formulated certain demands and provided for the taking of a strike vote if the,demands were not met by the employers. One of the principal points in the proposals of the convention was that there was to be one coast-wide agreement rather than separate port agreements. Harry Bridges, now president of I. L. W. U. and of the I. L. W. U. District No. 1, testified that the longshoremen felt that the loss of the strikes in 1916 and 1919 was due to the lack of proper coast coordination among the longshoremen, which permitted the companies to play one port against the other. After the employers had refused to accede to their demands, the longshoremen voted to strike on March 23, 1934. But on March 22 President Roosevelt appointed a Mediation Board and the- con- templated strike did not take place. Hearings were held before the Mediation Board, and on April 3 an agreement was entered into be- tween the San Francisco local and the Waterfront Employers' Union of San Francisco, an' organization of companies operating in the San Francisco area, which provided for the recognition of the I. L. A. as the representative of the men in the port and for the negotiation of the wage differences. Negotiations on the wage ques- tion, however, were fruitless. The longshoremen 'reiterated their demand for a coast agreement, and on May 9, 1934, all the long- shoremen on the Pacific Coast went out on strike. Within a week the seamen, boilermakers, and machinists had joined in the strike. Later the teamsters and licensed officers also struck. On May 28 a proposal for settlement was made which provided that the employers in each of the ports of San Francisco, Los An- geles, Seattle, and Portland would recognize the I. L. A. as the representative ' of the longshoremen in those ports. This proposal was rejected by the longshoremen because it was not a coast-wide agreement and because it did not provide a settlement for the other maritime unions on strike. On June 16 another proposal, signed by Joseph P. Ryan, president of I. L. A., and by one of the District officials, was rejected by a referendum of the longshoremen because it provided no settlement for the other maritime unions on strike. After June 16 a Joint Strike Committee was set up to coordinate the activities of the various maritime unions on strike and to replace the loose form of cooperation that had existed prior to this time. In the northwest ports a Northwest Joint Strike Committee was formed. On June 26, 1934, President Roosevelt appointed a board, known as the National Longshoremen's Board, consisting of Archbishop Hanna, O. K. Cushing, and E. F. McGrady, to mediate the strike. This Board effectuated a settlement of the strike and the longshore- DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1009 men returned to work on July 31, 1934. The settlement provided that the issues in dispute which involved the longshoremen were to be submitted to arbitration and that, with respect to the other crafts on strike, collective bargaining negotiations were to be en- tered into if the maritime unions were found, after elections had been held, to represent a majority of the employees. The National Longshoremen's Board, acting as an arbitration board, held hearings in various ports on the Coast. Melnikow and Kagel, of the Pacific Coast Labor Bureau, represented the long- shoremen, and the employers were represented by Phleger. On October 12, 1934, an arbitration award, which constituted a series of agreements between the longshoremen and the regional associa- tions of employers, was made. The Award set basic wage rates and hour provisions and provided for the establishment of jointly operated hiring halls. It was to be binding one all parties until September 30, 1935, and was to be automatically renewed from year to year unless written notice of the desire of any of the parties to terminate or modify the Award was given 40 days prior to its expiration date. The Award was renewed in 1935 by virtue of the automatic re- newal clause. In 1936 both parties gave notice of a desire to modify the terms of the Award. The longshoremen, in reopening negotia- tions, were motivated not only by a desire to effect certain amend- ments but also by the fact that they did not want to be so bound by the contract as to prevent their acting jointly with the other mari- time unions if the latter decided that they wanted to change any of their working conditions. In September 1936 the. Coast Negotiating Committee, consisting of representatives of the longshoremen and of the maritime unions, was set up to conduct negotiations with the maritime employers. This Coast Negotiating Committee, after fail- ing to arrive at any understanding through collective bargaining ne- gotiations, recommended to each union that a referendum be taken to empower their representatives on the Coast Committee to take strike action on October 28, 1936. On October 28 all the maritime unions simultaneously went out on strike. The Coast Negotiating Committee, during the period of the strike, was designated the Coast Policy Committee. An agreement terminating the strike was reached on February 4, 1937. The agreement of February 4, 1937, nominally an amendment to the Award of the National Longshoremen's Board, contains an iden- tical automatic renewal clause except that a 60-day period was set up within which to give notice of desire to terminate. The hiring of all longshoremen was to be through a hall maintained jointly'by The Pacific Coast District of the I. L. A., and the employers' associations. 1010 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD A Labor Relations Committee, composed of three representatives of the Employers Association and three representatives of the long- shoremen, was to be set up in each port. The Labor Relations Com- mittee maintains and operates the hiring hall, is in charge of the registration list of regular longshoremen from which the longshore- men assigned to work must be chosen, makes additions to the regis- tered list, investigates and adjudicates all grievances and disputes relating to working agreements, decides all grievances relating to dis- charges, and in case of discharge without sufficient cause, may order payment for lost time or reinstatement with or without payment for lost time. It determines the organization of gangs and method of dispatching, and chooses the personnel of the hiring hall, with the exception of the dispatcher, who, under the agreement, is to be selected by the I. L. A. The agreement states that preference of em- ployment is to be given to members of Pacific Coast District Inter- national Longshoremen's Association whenever available. The agreement of February 4 provided for further negotiations with respect to rates on penalty cargo," the maximum loads on slings which the longshoremen would have to handle, and safety provi- sions. No agreement has been attained with respect to a safety code, but an agreement as to penalty cargoes was reached on April 16, 1937, and an agreement as to maximum loads was reached on April 23, 1937. Several small locals rejected these agreements, but they were bound by the majority vote. Bridges testified that the long- shoremen in San Francisco accepted the maximum loads agreement, which set standards of distinct benefits to longshoremen in ports other than San Francisco, even though the loads provided for were greater than the San Francisco longshoremen had had to handle previously. The provisions of the agreement of February 4, 1937, and of the penalty cargoes and maximum loads agreements, are those in effect at the present time. The contracts are more fully discussed in Sec- tions IV-VII below. IV. THE HISTORY OF I. L. W. U. Early in 1937 many I. L. A. locals passed resolutions in favor of, and pledges of support and sympathy for, the C. I. O. Prior to the annual convention of the Pacific Coast District of the I. L. A., Bridges, a president of the District, and the other District officers, circulated a report among the various locals which recommended that the District support the C. I. 0., and that a referendum of the 8 Penalty cargo Is that cargo , which, because of the danger or discomfort or difficulty in handling, entitles the longshoreman to greater pay. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1011 International organization on the question of supporting and affiliat- ing with the C. L O. be held. It was intended that the report be discussed in the locals, and that the delegates to the convention from the various locals be 'instructed on this issue. The District Convention, meeting in Seattle in May 1937, adopted Bridges' report, and took the further action of recommending to its locals that they refuse to pay any assessment to the International which would be used to fight the C. I. O. and of deciding that a referendum would be taken to see how far the District would go in such refusal.9 The longshoremen believed that the A. F. of L. Executive Council, in its meeting at Cincinnati in June 1937, had decided upon extra assessments from its international unions for the purpose of fighting the C. I. 0., and that Ryan had agreed that the I. L. A. would pay this extra assessment. Communications were sent to Ryan asking if he had taken the position that he was willing to pay the extra assess- ment. The communications were not answered. At this time the Maritime Federation, with which the Pacific Coast District and other maritime unions were associated, held its con- vention at Portland, Oregon. Since the convention in February 1935, the I. L. A. delegates to the Maritime Federation conventions had been designated the I. L. A. caucus. On occasion, representa- tives of the I. L. A. International had met with the caucus. The I. L. A. caucus, after the failure of Ryan to reply to the communi- cations sent him concerning the extra assessments, decided to adopt the recommendation of the Maritime Federation Convention that each of its member unions hold a coastwise referendum to determine whether or not their members wished to become affiliated with the C. I. 0., and, on June 14, blank ballots providing for a vote on the question of affiliating with the C. I. 0. and the question of re- turning the defense fund, which was not very large at the time, were sent to the locals. The American Radio Telegraphists' Associa- tion and the Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association, both members of the Maritime Federation, had, at this time, already become affili- ated with the C. I. O. The results of the vote among the members of the Pacific Coast District of the I. L. A. were 11,771 in favor of affiliating with the 9 The resolutions, under the heading "Unity of the Labor Movement and the C. I 0." read "RESOLVED: In the event any assessment is levied by the AFL and any attempt is made to collect from locals such assessment, the purpose of which is to carry on a fight against any bona fide group, either nationally or locally, we request unions refuse to pay such assessments and entire District organization back up any local who may be disci- plined because of their stand, and be it still further "RESOLVED • That our District officials and Executive Board stand instructed to take a referendum ballot to determine to what extent we will go in our refusal " 1012 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD C. I. O. and 3,625 opposed to affiliation;b0 the longshoremen's vote was 7,073 in favor of affiliating with the C. I. O. and 2,263 opposed.h1 On July 18, 1937,12 the District Executive Board 13 met at Seattle, Washington. They approved the taking of the referendum by the I. L. A. caucus and instructed the officers to apply to the C. I. O. for a charter. They decided that they would operate with the same officers and the same Executive Board, that the District and the several locals would function as previously under their existing con- stitutions, and that the Executive Board should revise the District Constitution in so far as that was made necessary by the new affilia- tion. On July 18; 1937, the Executive Board authorized the officers to apply for a C. I. O. charter, and Ryan was informed of this on July 19. On July 22, 1937, the following letter, together with a blank form of application for an International Longshoremen's Association charter, was received by the Pacific Coast District Locals : To ALL PACIFIC COAST DISTRICT LOCALS, I. L. A. DEAR SIRS AND BROTHERS : President Harry Bridges of the Pa- cific Coast District has notified our International Association that the Pacific Coast District membership is seceding from our International Organization to join the group known as the C. I. O. Naturally, the majority rules, but the experience of the Pa- cific Coast longshoremen in the past has been that by following radical leadership they have had to leave it to the Atlantic Coast District membership to set their wages, and with the exception of the port of Tacoma (where they remained loyal to our Inter- national Association) they have had nothing to say about their condition. We, therefore, feel that any ports that wish to remain loyal to our International should do so, and that any group in any port should be permitted to retain their affiliation with the I. L. A. Charters will be issued to these minority groups in each port who wish to make application for same, and those who wish 10 The Pacific Coast District of the I. L. A. contained classes of workers other than long- shoremen It included warehousemen , checkers, scalers and miscellaneous employees such as watchmen , gatemen, shipping clerks, etc. 11 This includes the vote of several small locals in Hawaii and in Alaska. 12 At this time the vote had not yet been completed In a letter dated July 16, 1937, Meehan stated that the vote among the members of the Pacific Coast District was 11,441 in favor of C. I. O. affiliation and 3 , 349 opposed to such affiliation. 13 This was a "lame duck " Executive Board A new Executive Board had been regularly voted for by the 1. L. A. membership but the votes had not yet been counted. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1013 to remain in a body can return their present serial charters and direct charters will be issued. We request that you give this serious consideration, as I under- stand that the other marine organizations on the Pacific Coast are not going to affiliate with the C. I. O.-The Teamsters are remaining loyal to the American Federation of Labor and the Longshoremen may again find themselves alienated from the rest of the labor movement. We guarantee the entire backing of the International Long- shoremen's Association to the membership who wish to remain loyal to us. Fraternally yours, (S) JOSEPH P. RYAN, International President. On July 30, 1937 , Almon E. Roth, president of Waterfront Em- ployers Association of the Pacific Coast, sent a letter to Bridges, addressed as president of International Longshoremen's Association, Local No. 38 , in which it was stated that the Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast would not give notice of modification or termination of the February 4 agreement, which would be auto- matically renewed at midnight, July 31, 1937. On the same day, Bridges sent the following reply: SAN FRANCISCO, CALIF., Juiy 30, 1937. Mr. ALMON E. ROTH, President, Waterfront Employers' Association of the Pacific Coast, 215 Market Street, San Francisco , California. , DEAR SIR : This will acknowledge receipt of your communica- tion of July 30, 1937, expressing intention of not giving notice of modification or termination of existing agreements and thereby automatically renewing them for another year. We hereby advise you that it is not our intention to give notice of modification or termination of existing agreements and that therefore they will be automatically renewed for another year. We note the change of your designation to Waterfront Em- ployers' Association of the Pacific Coast. Please be advised that by action of our Executive Board in compliance with the vote of our membership we have likewise changed our name to International Longshoremen 's and Warehousemen 's Union. Yours very truly, (Sgd.) H. R. Bridges. H. R. BRIDGES, President. A C. I. O. charter was received on August 11, 1937. On September 10 and 11, the Executive Board met at San Francisco. They decided 1014 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD that the name "International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union" would be adopted, that the body would become the "Execu- tive Board of the International Longshoremen and Warehousemen's Union", that they would dissociate themselves from District 38 of the I. L. A. and the International, that the District would become known as District No. 1, I. L. W. U., and that charters would be issued to the various locals. They agreed to be bound by the deci- sions of the last and previous I. L. A. conventions. From August_ 24, 1937, on, all the locals of longshoremen with the exception of four, applied for charters from the I. L. W. U. District. The four exceptions were the Tacoma, Olympia, Port Angeles, and Anacortes locals, all in the Puget Sound area. At the present time, there are about 10,575 Pacific Coast longshoremen in the locals that are a part of I. L. W. U. District No. 1, and about 904 longshoremen in the locals that have remained with the I. L. A.14 The Tacoma local, on September 7, 1937, set up a committee of six to coordinate their efforts to stay in the I. L. A., and to maintain themselves as the I. L. A. District. The committee called an "emer- gency convention" at San Francisco on September 20 or 21, 1937, at which time officers were chosen ; most of the old officers now were the officers of the I. L. W. U. The emergency convention instructed Calkins, who had been elected secretary-treasurer, to send a letter to the employers letting them know that I. L. A. District No. 38 was still in existence and asking them to do business with it. Such a letter was sent, but an answer was never received. The emergency convention also passed a motion to the effect that they would operate under the International constitution. No men- tion was made of the District constitution. V. THE HISTORY OF TIIE EMPLOYER ASSOCIATIONS Melnikow, of the Pacific Coast Labor Bureau, testifying as an expert for I. L. W. U., and Thomas G. Plant, vice president of the American-Hawaiian Steamship Company, both stated that basic wages and hours of work for longshoremen on the Pacific Coast had been uniform since 1922. Melnikow attributed this to close coopera- tion between the employers of longshore labor on the Coast. There have been associations of employers of longshore labor in Seattle since 1908, in San Francisco since 1914, in Portland since 1921, and in San Pedro since 1923. In 1934, they were organized in four regional associations, Waterfront Employers of Seattle, Water- front Employers of Portland, Waterfront Employers' Union of San Francisco, and Marine Service Bureau of Los Angeles. Only a very 14 There are approximately 23,324 workers in all the locals that constitute a part of I. L W U. District No. 1, and 1 ,009 workers in locals that have remained in the Interna- tional Longshoremen's Association. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1015 small percentage of those companies which use longshore labor are not members of the various associations, and no large company is not a member. A committee consisting of representatives of the four associations was formed during the 1934 strike, and carried on the negotiations with the longshoremen which finally resulted in the October 12, 1934 Award of the National Longshoremen's Board. The Award was in the form of one document that was stated to be "a series of agree- ments between the International Longshoremen's Association, act- ing on behalf of various Locals whose members perform longshore labor," on the one hand, and each of the regional associations, sepa- rately, on the other hand. _ Marine Service Bureau of Los Angeles subsequently became Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California, and Waterfront Employers' Union of San Francisco became Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco. Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California includes the employers in the ports of Los Angeles, San Pedro, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Ventura, and other ports in that vicinity. Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco covers the San Francisco Bay region through the northern part of California. Waterfront Employers of Portland includes the Oregon and Columbia River ports, and Waterfront Em- ployers of Seattle includes the ports of Washington, excluding the ports on the Columbia River. In May 1935 Francis P. Foisie was given the task of coordinating the activities of the four regional associations and was entitled Coast Coordinator. Foisie testified that it was the general understanding among the members of the associations that as long as they remained members they could not enter into individual agreements with long- shore unions. In the spring of 1936, representatives chosen by the regional asso- ciations met at San Francisco. A committee appointed by this con- ference recommended to the whole group : 1. That the Committee appointed by the Conference and sub- sequently confirmed by the above-mentioned associations, be continued as the Committee. 2. That the Committee be known as: The Coast Committee for the Shipowners acting on behalf of Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California, Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco, Waterfront Employers of Portland, Waterfront Employers of Seattle. 3. That the Committee be authorized to act exclusively in behalf of the four Association's of Waterfront Employers in con- nection with or by reason of the pending expiration of their con- tracts with the Pacific Coast District of the International Long- 106791-38-vol vii-65 1016 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOA1BD shoremen's Association, including the determination and execu- tion of all matters relating to negotiation of new labor contracts, or termination, or renewal, or modification of existing contracts, and the settlement of any and all disputes that may arise in connection therewith. 6. That the Committee shall work toward one basic settlement of the matters relating to the four Associations of employers of longshore labor. The recommendations were adopted and ratified by the four asso- ciations, and the Coast Committee, consisting of T. J. Plant, T. B. Wilson, John Walsh, E. T. Ford, W. P. Bannister, Hugh Gallagher, and Joseph J. Lunny, was set tip. Shortly after it was formed, the Coast Committee gave notice to the I. L. A. Pacific Coast District that they desired amendments to the contract which would have renewed itself on September 30, 1936. The Union gave a similar notice. The Coast Committee then took charge-of negotiations with the longshoremen, and, after the 1936- 1937 strike, reached the agreement of February 4, 1937, which was an agreement between Pacific Coast District, Local 38 of the Interna- tional Longshoremen's Association, and the Coast Committee for the shipowners, on behalf of the four associations. - In June 1937 an association known as Waterfront Employers Asso- ciation of the Pacific Coast was created. Almon E. Roth, president of the Association, testified that the Coast Committee had felt that the renewal and execution of new contracts would call for some central agency which would assume the same function which had been per- formed by the various port associations, and that the Coast Associa- tion was formed for that purpose. Harrison, counsel for the Asso- ciation, testified that it was an association of those engaged in the shipping business created for the purpose of formulating labor pol- icies up and down the Pacific Coast in connection with longshore labor and other matters in which they were interested. He stated that the prime emphasis was on labor policy. Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast includes in its membership voting members, which are firms "regularly en- gaged in carrying cargo by water to and from any port on the Pacific Coast of the United States (except Alaska ports) , or any agent designated by such firm ...... and associate members, which are firms "employing longshoremen or other shore employees in any port on the Pacific Coast of the United States." Voting power is restricted to the voting members.15 li V'oting power is distributed among the voting members in accordance with the tonnage of cargo handled by such member in the preceding calendar year. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1017 Officials of the Association stated that, although all of the ship- ping companies, included in the first class of membership, require longshore labor for their operations, few of them hire longshore workers directly. 11 the necessary longshore work is, in the greater number of instances, done by the stevedoring companies, which con- stitute the associate-member class. It was the contention of counsel for the employers that, because of this fact and because the regional associations can act independently in matters involving longshore labor, Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast is not closely concerned with the negotiation of agreements concerning longshore labor on the Pacific Coast or with the terms of employment of longshore labor except in so far as it acts as a clearing house for information for the regional associations. It is clear, however, that both the shipping companies and Water- front Employers Association of the Pacific Coast are intimately associated with the employment of longshore labor and the negotia- tion and execution of agreements concerning longshore labor. The Coast Committee for the shipowners, which negotiated the agreement of February 4, 1937, consisted of seven men, only one of whom was a representative of a company that regularly employed longshore labor. The list of members of the regional associations which is attached to the February 4 agreement for the purpose of indicating what companies were represented, contains the names of the shipping companies, and section 1 of the agreement contains the following paragraph : It is agreed and understood that if the employers, parties to this agreement shall sub-contract work as. defined herein, pro- vision shall be made for the observance of this agreement.17 The Amended Articles of Incorporation of Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, in stating the purposes of the Asso- ciation, refers generally to members without distinguishing between voting and associate members: ARTICLE II The said corporation is one which does not contemplate pe- cuniary gain or profit for its members and is formed for the following purposes and objects: 1. To encourage the establishment and maintenance of fair and reasonable wages and working conditions for longshore work ' The statement may be misleading, in that the record does not indicate the percentage of the longshoi e work on the Pacific Coast , in terms of tonnage, that is performed by the longshoremen hired directly by these companies 17 Section 3 of the Amended Articles of Incorporation , quoted below , also refers to con- tracts between members of the Association and other employers in matters relating to the emplo3ment of longshoremen. 1018 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and other work ashore relating to steamship service and, by the establishment and maintenance of harmonious and peaceful industrial relations between employer and employee, to promote dependable and efficient steamship service in the public interest; 2. To fix, establish and maintain on behalf of its members policies in all matters relating to longshore work and other em- ployments ashore at Pacific Coast ports of the United States (except Alaska ports) ; 3. To represent its members and others in matters relating to the employment of longshoremen and other shore employees at said ports including the negotiation, execution and performance of contracts ii ith other employers or groups thereof and contracts with groups or associations of longshoremen and other shore em- ployees governing wages, hours and conditions of such employ- ment ; 4. To assist, represent and act in behalf of the members and others in connection with any violations of agreements relating to longshore or other employments ashore at said ports, to the end that all such agreements shall'be faithfully performed by all parties thereto; The bylaws provide that the regional associations shall each be entitled to designate two representatives, one to be selected for knowledge of stevedoring, the other for knowledge of terminal or dock operation. These representatives are to attend meetings of the Board of Directors of the Coast Association, although they do not have any voting power. The bylaws provide that members are bound by contracts entered into by the Coast Association unless they resign within 7 days after the vote on the contract.18 The bylaws also provide that: ARTICLE XVIII SECTION I. This corporation shall have power to establish pol- icies for its members and the corporation in all matters relating to labor contracts and labor controversies and shall have power to represent and act on behalf of its members in any negotiations carried on by the corporation on behalf of its members with unions of longshoremen or other employments ashore and, sub- ject to the provisions of Article V of these by-laws, any contracts, commitments or undertakings made by this corporation on be- half of its members with any union shall bind the members of this corporation. . . . 18 BY_Laws-Article V. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1019 SEC. 2. If any union, its members or officials, shall violate any labor contract or award relating to wages, hours or working conditions to which agreement or award this corporation or any of its members is a party, whether by strikes, stoppages of work or in any other manner, any member affected thereby shall notify the corporation. . . . If compliance is not secured, a meeting of the members of this corporation shall forthwith be called and all members of this corporation shall take whatever action shall be determined by a vote of members holding at least a majority of the voting power of the membership, pro- vided that there shall be no suspension or termination of any such contract or agreement for breach thereof without the con- sent of members representing at least two-thirds of the voting power of the entire membership. Provided further that written notice of any such vote or consent shall be immediately given by registered mail to all members and no such vote or consent shall bind any member who did not join therein and who resigns within seven days after the date of mailing of such notice.ia In July 1937 the following resolution was adopted by the four regional associations : Be it hereby resolved, that the Waterfront Employers Associa- tion of the Pacific Coast, a nonprofit corporation, be, and the same is, hereby authorized on behalf of this association, and as its act and deed, to act in all matters relating to the expira- tion of pending contracts between this association and the Inter- national Longshoremen's Association or any Local thereof, in- clud:n g the determination and execution of all matters relating to the negotiation of new labor contracts or termination or renewal or modification of existing contracts and the settlement of any and all disputes that may arise in connection therewith.20 It should be noted that this language closely parallels the language in the recommendations which led to the setting up of the Coast Committee. 11 With regard to cooperation in strikes , the bylaws provide that : If any labor union or association of working men or any members of any such union or association shall violate any agreement with this corporation , or with any mem- ber thereof, or shall refuse to work for any member or members of this corporation, the Board of Directors shall, upon application , cause investigation to be made, and if the Board of Directors shall find that such union or association is at fault , and fails or retuses to make reparation or otherwise remedy such violation or refusal to the satisfaction of the Board of Directors , and if this corporation after investigation shall desire to resist the demands of such union or member thereof, this corporation shall render to such member or members of this corporation the fullest moral support, and shall pay such expenses incurred by such member in any strike , lockout or other labor trouble caused by such action of the union, association or member or members thereof, as shall be approved and limited by the Board of Directors of this corporation in advance . .-Article XX. m Roth testified that, as far as he knew, this authorization has never been revoked. 1020 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The letter of July 30, 1937, referred to above, indicating that the employers wished to let the February 4 agreement renew itself, was signed by Roth, president of Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, on behalf of the four regional associations. Grievances and ordinary disputes are usually referred to the Labor Relations Committee of the port. In the small ports in the North- west, however, the employers generally have one man to represent them. This representative takes care of routine questions. If, how- ever. a dispute of any importance occurs, two more representatives are sent by the Association involved, and they, together with the local representative, act as the employers' committee to deal with the dispute. In cases where the dispute is of some importance, either because it is in a large port, or because it involves a problem of general application, the local Labor Relations Committee will be advised in the matter by Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast or by the regional association. Foisie, who, since the creation of the Coast Asso- ciation, has been acting as assistant to Roth, has on occasion gone into the port to assist in the settlement. When the dispute threatens a stoppage of \vork, Roth or Foisie or other officials confer with Bridges or Meehan, secretary of I. L. W. U. District No. 1, or other District officials, in an attempt to reach a settlement. The record contains a large number of communications from Roth to Bridges and to Meehan, all dealing with unsettled dis- putes. Both Bridges and Meehan testified as to other communications, telephone conversations, and personal conferences. Thus, in actual practice, matters of importance are referred to Roth's office.: Before the formation of the Coast Association, they were referred to the office of Foisie, coast coordinator, or Gregory Har- rison, counsel for the companies. The history of the formation and actual operation of the various associations of companies on the Pacific Coast convinces us that, with respect to longshore labor, these companies function entirely through the regional associations and through Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, and that the regrional associations operate as a closely integrated unit. The Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast is an association of owners and operators of steam schooners which are engaged in the carrying of lumber from the Northwest ports. There is a supple- mentary agreement, between International Longshoremen's Associa- tion, Pacific Coast District No. 38 and the Shipowners Association, 21 Roth is president of Waterfiont Employeis Association of the Pacific Coast, Water- front Employers Association of San Francisco, and of Pacific-American Shipoowneis' Asso- ciation, an organization of American-owned lines having their principal ports on the Pacific Coast and organized for the purpose of representing its members in connection with labor matters relating to off-shore as distinguished from on-shore labor The three Associations occupy the same offices in the Federal Reserve Building in San Francisco DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1021 attached to the February 4, 1937, agreement , which provides that all the provisions of that agreement are to apply to the signatories, except the provision defining the scope of longshore work. The crews on these steam schooners usually do some of the work ordinarily classi- fied as longshore work and the steam schooner operators did not want to be bound by the provisions of the agreement with respect to that portion of the longshore work done by the crews. Plant stated that the negotiations for the supplementary agreement were carried on separately. He testified, however, that in the nego- tiations terminating the 1936-1937 strike, the Coast Committee broke themselves up into subcommittees. The negotiations for the Ship- owners Association were, according to Plant, carried on by Lunny, a member , of the Coast Committee, and Ralph Myers , president of the Shipowners Association. Bridges testified that Plant did most of the talking for the Shipowners' Association of the Pacific. Lunny, though a member of the Coast Committee, spent most of his time on steam- schooner affairs. Finally, there was a joint conference and the agree- ment and supplementary agreement were entered into. It will be noted that the supplementary agreement merely serves to except steam schooners from one provision of the main agreement. In all other respects, the individual companies which are members of the Shipowners Association are affected in the same manner as are the companies belonging to the regional associations. Longshoremen are hired in the same manner and on the same terms ; disputes go through the same Labor Relations Committee in the port; and when a settlement cannot be reached the matter is re- ferred by the companies to Bridges . Lunny and Myers are members of the Board of Directors of Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast. The record contains evidence of a letter on the letterhead of the Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, dated April 7, 1937, addressed to E. S. Coates, manager of the Waterfront Employers Association of Portland and signed by F. T. Foisie with the notation that copies were to be sent to A. E. Roth and Ralph Myers. The letter concerns a dispute in the opera- tion of a steam schooner. Roth stated, when questioned about this letter, that the Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast advises the Shipowners Association in matters concerning labor policy. It is evident that the labor relations of the members of the Shipowners Association of the Pacific Coast are handled in the same manner and through the same agencies as are the labor relations of the members of the 'regional associations. VI. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT In its petition'for investigation and certification of representatives I. L. W. U. District No: 1 asserts that the unit most appropriate for 1022 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the purposes of collective bargaining consists of all the workers em- ployed at longshore labor in the Pacific Coast ports of the United States. It is the contention of the companies that the appropriate bargaining unit for longshoremen must be one- restricted to those longshoremen in the employ of a particular employer at a particular Pacific Coast port. The history of bargaining and the history of employee organiza- tion, as set forth in previous sections, are completely persuasive of the fact that a unit including all the workers employed at longshore labor in the Pacific Coast ports of the United States is the one that will insure to employees the full benefit of their right to self-organi- zation and to collective bargaining, and will otherwise effectuate the policies of the At. Particularly, the failure of the longshoremen to achieve any satis- factory collective bargaining agreements when the bargaining was on a local scale is to be contrasted with the highly successful collec- tive bargaining achievements when the longshoremen bargained as a coast unit. From 1934 on, the longshoremen have rejected proposed agreements which were not coast-wide in scope, have bargained as a coast unit, and have been working under one coast-wide agreement. In dealing with the employers, the longshoremen have done so through the District, as has been shown.22 In dealing with the employers, the longshoremen have cooperated with the other maritime crafts and with the crew personnel. The proposals of May 28, 1934, and June 16, 1934, were rejected by the longshoremen because they did not provide a settlement for the other group on strike. The Joint Strike Committees in 1934, the Coast Negotiating Committee and the Coast Policy Committee in 1936, and the existence of the Maritime Federation of the Pacific, all bear wit- ness to the identity of interest and the method of cooperation of the longshoremen and the other maritime groups. These maritime unions, including the American Radio Telegraphists' Association, the Marine Engineers Beneficial Association, the Marine Cooks and Stewards of the Pacific, and West Coast Local No. 90 of the Masters, Mates and Pilots of America, are organized on a coast basis, and the longshoremen have found that in order to work effectively with them, they too had to organize on a coast basis. The history of collective bargaining and of the organization of the longshoremen, and the sacrifice of some of the longshoremen on the maximum-loads agreement, are ample evidence of their desire for a coast unit. Several clauses in the I. L. W. U. constitution are 22 Further, convention rulings decree that the locals are not to enter into separate port agieemcnts Respondent Exhibit No. 13 lists many port agreements, but almost none of them involve the longshore locals. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1023 also indicative of the desires of the longshoremen in this regard. Thus Article XIII reads : SECTION 1. When any I. L. W. U. local is forced to dissolve due to its membership being thrown out of work by the ceasing of the sole source of employment, the locals of the Sub-district in which the dissolved local is located will be required to accept the unemployed members on a pro rata basis, provided that if the Sub-district locals cannot absorb said members, they will be divided. pro rata amongst the locals of the salve craft of District 1. Under this clause, longshoremen from the ports of Stockton and Garibaldi are now working in other ports. Article XVIII,23 which provides that any longshoreman in the District may obtain a visiting card which will give him work privileges in a port other than his own, for a period of 30 days, also shows the feeling of identity of interest among the longshoremen. Action by the longshoremen, if it is to be effective, must be con- certed and coordinated. At the present time, sympathy among the longshoremen is such that, in the absence of other factors, they will refuse to work ships diverted from a port in which there has been a lock-out. Unless the longshoremen's activities are completely in- tegrated, therefore, there will be disorganized strikes. Bridges stressed the fact that such strikes must be avoided by the longshore- men, if they are to keep their organization. To this end, the District officials, in April 1936, ordered the longshoremen to work ships diverted from San Francisco, where there had been a lock-out, and, in January 1938, the I. L. W. U. officials ordered the working of ships diverted from Seattle, where there had been a lock-out. The lessons of the disastrous local strikes in 1916 and 1919 have brought home to the longshoremen the fact that action that is not coast-wide will result in a harmful set-back to their self-organization. The companies contend that the working rules differ in various ports, and that that is indicative of the impropriety of a coast unit. It must be noted, however, that wages, hours, methods of hiring, methods of settling grievances, payment for penalty cargoes, and maximum sling loads are uniform on the Pacific Coast. There are 2 'Article XVIII reads : SECTION 1. Any member of District 1 so desiring may procure from his local secre- tary a visiting card showing that he is paid up to date and in good standing, which will entitle him to the following privileges in any local of the District of a similar craft SECTION 2 Work privileges accorded to a local member shall be for a period not to exceed thirty days unless agreeable to the local being visited Snoriom 3 All locals of the District shall be required to accept a minimum of visi- tors of one per cent of their membership, but no local should be visited more than once a year by any one member unless agreeable to local so visited. 1024 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD divergences in working rules only in minor matters. Thus, for ex- ample, the longshoremen in the San Francisco area are paid for their "travelling-time," which is the time spent travelling across San Francisco Bay to their work, if that is necessary. Other differences in working rules among the ports may be due to differences in cargo handled. Even in these minor matters, the drive is for uniformity among the ports. Thus in the Northwest the longshoremen have a committee to meet with the companies and to decide upon working rules for the longshoremen in the locals on Puget Sound, including the Aberdeen and Grays Harbor locals. This committee consists of representatives from the I. L. A. Locals in that area, as well as from the I. L. W. U. locals. Similarly, in the Columbia River area, the negotiations, carried on in Portland, are on a regional basis. Since the essential working rules are on a coast-wide basis, and since port differences occur only in nonessential matters, the argument against a coast unit, based on working rules, does not carry much weight. This is especially true when it is considered that the working rules are determined upon, in the main, by the Labor Relations Com- mittees which are set up by the coast-wide agreement. The numerous factors which have been pointed to as indicating that the coast unit is the one which will best insure to the longshoremen the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bargain- ing, are all reflections of the organization of the employers. , The history of bargaining and of the longshoremen's organizations is a vivid portrayal of the experiences of the longshoremen as they learned that, since their employers were acting together on a coast basis, they, too, would have to build a coast organization which would parallel the organization of the employers. The desires of the men for a coast unit are the result of their failures when they acted on a port basis, and their success when they acted with their fellow longshoremen on the coast. The imperative need of the longshoremen for the coast unit and the dangers of smaller units arise because the companies on the Pacific Coast which use their labor are organized on a coast basis. We have set out in some detail the history of the organization of these companies and we have considered the present set-up of the four regional associations, Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast, and Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast. The organization of the employers is another important factor which militates toward the conclusion that the coast unit is the one most appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. It is contended that the Board has no jurisdiction to go beyond the individual company in deciding upon an appropriate unit of em- ployees. The Board, however, is expressly given the authority to de- cide that the "employer" unit is the unit most appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. The Act includes within the term employer DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1025 "any person acting in the interest of an employer, directly or indi- rectly," and the term person. "includes one or more . . . associa- tions We have, in our examination of the functioning of the regional asso- ciations, pointed out how the associations engaged in collective bar- gaining for the individual companies, how the associations took charge of the operation and execution of the agreement, and how they dealt with the longshoremen in all matters involving labor relations. In- deed, the contract so regulates the hiring, dispatching, conditions of work, payment for work, and method of settling grievances, that the individual company can be said to exercise very few of the functions which are the essential attributes of the employer-employee relation- ship. The regional associations clearly act in the interest of these various companies. We have also shown the close articulation between the regional associations, effected by Waterfront Employers Associa- tion of the Pacific Coast, and the fact that, in actual practice, the existence'of the Coast Association resulted in the regional associa- tions' acting through the Coast Association as an integrated unit. What has been stated as applicable to the various regional associa- tions is substantially true of Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast. We find that the workers who do the longshore work in the Pacific Coast ports of the United States for the companies which are members of Waterfront Employers of Seattle, Waterfront Employers of Port- land, Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco, Water- front Employers Association of Southern California, and Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure to these workers the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act. F. T. Foisie testified that the term "longshoremen" quite frequently includes everyone who works either on board ship or on the docks, but that in the various ports there may be subdivisions of longshore- men, dock workers, grain handlers, etc. The exact meaning of these latter categories and the type of work which the men in these cate- gories handle, varies from port to port. The type of work which the individual longshoreman does may also vary. The categories "permit men" and "casual men" also have different meanings in the various ports. It will be necessary, therefore, to discuss by individ- ual ports the groups of men which we conclude are to be compre- hended in the term "longshoremen." This will be done in Section IX below. The walking boss is the individual who has general supervision over the loading and discharging of the entire ship. The I. L. W. U. 1026 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD desires to have the walking bosses included in the unit; the majority of the walking bosses are Union members. The I. L. A. had a sep- arate local for walking bosses but the I. L. W. U. refuses to charter such a local. Walking bosses are not dispatched or hired through the hiring hall, they follow the ship, except in the case of small companies, where the walking boss is on an hourly basis and may be in the employ of more than one company. Walking bosses have memoranda of understanding with the individual company, not with the employers' associations. Because of this difference in their re- lations with employers, walking bosses are not to be considered as within that category of longshoremen which constitutes the appro- priate unit defined above. VII. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION Gregory Harrison , counsel for the companies , testified that the letter of July 30, 1937, from Roth to Bridges , in which it was stated that Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast would not give notice of a desire to terminate the agreement , and the reply of the same date, in which Bridges stated that the longshoremen, too, wanted to renew, and in which he noted the new name "Water- front Employers Association of the Pacific Coast," and stated that "by action of our Executive Board in compliance with the vote of our membership we have likewise changed our name to International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen 's Union," were both put into a circular which was mailed to all members of the associations. The letters were widely commented upon by the newspapers on the Coast. At this time , the referendum had been taken, the July 18 meeting of the Executive Board at Seattle had been held , the C. I. O. charter had been applied for, and only a few formal steps remained before the change of affiliation would be completely effected. Thus , the em- ployers were permitting the agreement to renew itself when they had full knowledge of the situation among the longshoremen and knowledge that they were now dealing with the I. L. W U. And in the execution of the contract the employers have been con- stantly dealing with the I. L. W. U., for it is the I. L. W. U. which has been taking care of the detailed performance of the contract, except in the case of the four Puget Sound ports which voted against affiliation with the C . I. O. The longshoremen who work the cargo on the ships and clocks are I . L. W. U. members. The hiring halls from which the longshoremen are dispatched to the work are main- tained jointly by the employers and the I. L. W. U.; the Labor Relations Committees , whicli operate the hiring halls and which set- tle disputes, consist of representatives of the regional associations and representatives of the I. L. W. U. Thus in San Francisco. for DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1027 example, employer members of the Labor Relations Committee, appointed by the executive members of Waterfront Employers Asso- ciation of San Francisco, have been regularly meeting and working with the I. L. W. U. representatives on the Committee. The dis- patchers in the hiring halls are all I. L. W. U. men. Preference of employnlnnt is given to I. L. W. U. men. The union to which the employers file complaints against individuals for violation of the agreement is the I. L. W. U., and the union which penalizes the indi- vidual longshoremen for such violation, as provided for in the agree- ment, is the I. L. W. U. In important disputes, Roth and Foisie con- . tact Bridges and Meehan, the president and secretary of the I. L. W. U. The I. L. W. U. has, in effect, completely taken over the con- tract, and the employers have, in actual fact, acquiesced and have joined with the I. L. W. U. in the execution of the contract. But the associations and companies have refused to give formal recognition to the I. L. W. U. Their communications to Bridges and Meehan, in 1937, have been addressed to these two in their former capacities as I. L. A. officials, although on at least two occasions,24 they have been asked to send communications to the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union. At the present time, they address their communications to Harry Bridges, without any further designation, at an address on Market Street, San Francisco. Occasionally, there are lapses. Thus, checks for the support of the hiring halls in San Francisco, which are drawn on the account of the Labor Relations Committee, have two lines for signatures, under one of which is printed "WEA of SF" and under the other is printed "ILW 1-10." The record also contains a telegram, dated March 10, 1938, from Roth to "Matt Meehan, International Long- shoremen's and Warehousemen's Union," which deals with a labor dispute. But formal recognition of the factual situation has always been refused. In li letter to Henry Schmidt, president of the San Fran- cisco local of the I. L. W. U., Roth denies that the I. L. W. U. had been recognized as the bargaining agency and states : I am writing to reaffirm our position of neutrality in the present inter-union controversy between the I. L. A. and I. L. W. U. Neither the San Francisco Waterfront Employers Association nor the Pacific Coast Waterfront Employers Asso- ciation has taken any position on the questions of which union is the proper collective, bargaining agency, or which union is entitled to administer the existing contract. On the contrary, we have repeatedly informed both you and Mr. Bridges that u The record contains two letters, dated August 18, 1937, and August 26, 1937, in which Bridges calls this to the employers ' attention 1028 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the Waterfront Employers would not take any position in favor of or against either of the parties to this controversy. My exact words were "we propose to walk straight down the middle of the road and let nature take its course". In a letter froln Roth to members of the Association, dated October 9, 1937, he states that the Association has taken no' position on the question of which union shall act as agent of the men in negotiating future renewals or modifications of the contract. While the practice of the parties during the period of the contract indicates an acceptance in fact of the I. L. W. U. District No. 1 as the labor organization party to the contract, it nevertheless is not necessary in this case to decide the precise legal status of the I. L. W. U. with respect to the contract. In considering the exist- ence of a question concerning representation we need only consider that the last day for notice of a desire to modify or terminate the contract is July 31, 1938, that the employers refuse to recognize the I. L. W. U. and that it is essential that the proper collective bargain- ing agency be designated, so that negotiations for the next period may be facilitated and properly conducted. We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of longshoremen doing longshore work for the companies which are members of the various regional associations. VIII. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION OF REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen, occurring in connection with operations of the companies described in Section I above, tends to lead to labor disputes burden- ing and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. IX. DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The longshoremen in each of the ports, with few exceptions,25 signed cards designating the I. L. W. U. as their exclusive repre- sentative for purposes of collective bargaining,26 which were pre- sented in evidence. Lists of the longshoremen doing the work in each of the ports were also put into evidence. However, the lists for Port Orford, Oregon, and Newport, Oregon, were not presented, ap- parently through inadvertence, nor was any mention made of Port Blakely, Washington, although that port is referred to in the peti- tion. These three ports are small ones as indicated by the number 25 It was noted above that the longshoremen in the poets of Tacoma, Olympia, Port Angeles, and Anacortes did not join in the change of affiliation 26 The cards read : "I am employed exclusively as a longshoieman I hereby designate .and select the International Longshoremen's and warehousemens Union as my exclusive representative for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to sates of pay. wages hours of employment and other conditions of employment.' DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1029 of longshoremen who voted in the June 1937 referendum, which was 7 in Port Blakely, 26 in Newport, and 14 in Port Orford. A state- ment 17 of the per capita tax paid by the longshore locals for the months of June and September 1937 indicates that, for Port Orford, Oregon, I. L. A. Local 38-115 paid a per capita tax in June on 24 members and that I. L. W. U. Local 1-5 paid a per capita tax in September for 24 members; that for Port Blakely, Washington, neither I. L. A. Local 38-2, nor I. L. W. U. Local 1-43 paid any per capita tax ; and that for Newport, Oregon, I. L. A. Local 38-110 paid a per capita tax in June on 32 members and I. L. W. U. Local 1-53 paid a per capita tax in September on 34 members. Thus, it is evi- dent that the results could not be affected by including the lists of longshoremen for these three ports .211 Counsel for the I. L. A. and the I. L. A. Locals argued that the designation of representatives made in these cards should not be con- sidered because of the fact that the nien were forced to sign the cards. However, they presented no evidence whatsoever to support their contentions, except in the case of the port at Bellingham. The record would support the opposite contention, for the I. L. W. U. showed that it took great care to have no check made upon nonsigners and to have the signing of the cards a strictly voluntary act on the part of the men. San Diego.-The longshoremen who have, in the last 6 months, been doing the longshore work in San Diego are the registered long- shoremen who are members of I. L. W. U. Local 1-29, and permit card holders. A document 29 purporting to list the registered long- shoremen in the Port of San Diego, furnished to the port by Water- front Employers Association of Southern California, was introduced into evidence. However, D. C. Mays, president of I. L. W. U. Local 1-29, testified that the list was not up-to-date and that it included the names of men who have not been working in the port for some time. He introduced into evidence a list 30 of members of the Local as of February 11, 1938, and a list" of permit card holders, also compiled from the records of the Local, and said that the men on these lists were those who have been doing the longshore work in the port during the last 6 months. In the absence of any objections to these lists and of any denial of their accuracy, we will accept them as representing the total of the longshore workers in the port. There are 83 registered men and 33 permit card holders. 7 Petitioner Exhibit No. 74. 21 Besides the cards, the returns on the June referendum are also strongly indicative of the sentiment of the longshoremen . The vote among the individual locals on the question of affiliation with the C I 0 is set out in appendix "H" 21 Board Exhibit No. 23. This exhibit contains 137 names. S0 Petitioner Exhibit No. 47. 31 Petitioner Exhibit No. 48. i 1030 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Ninety-three cards designating the I. L. W. U. as the exclusive col- lective bargaining representative were introduced into evidence. These cards were witnessed by Mays and J. Wilbur, secretary of the Local. Each of the witnesses personally knew the men signing the cards. The names on the cards have been checked and have been found to correspond with the names on the lists. There is no I. L. A. Local operating in San Diego. The men are hired through the hiring hall which is maintained jointly by Local 1-29 and by Waterfront Employers Association of Southern Cali- fornia. Relations with employers are carried in the same manner as they were when the Local was I. L. A. Local 38-9. Santa Barbara, Ventura and vicinity.-Substantially all the long- shore work in these harbors was formerly done by members of I. L. A. Locals 38-105 and 38-129. These men are now members of I. L. W. U. Local 1-46. Thirty-two cards were introduced into evidence. These cards were witnessed by Edmund Masson, secretary-treasurer of Local 1-46, who testified that lie knew all the signers personally. His own card was also introduced. Masson identified the signature of Joseph Pico, whose card was not witnessed. The names on the cards have been checked and have been found to correspond to the names on it list of longshoremen furnished by Waterfront Employers Asso- ciation of San Francisco.32 That list contains 75 names. When a line is not drawn through the word "exclusively" in the sentence "I am employed exclusively as a longshoreman" the signer is a member of the Union ; when a line is drawn through the word "exclusively" as it was in the case of 13 of the cards, the signer is not a registered longshoreman but has appeared on the pay roll of the ships coming into these ports and has worked on the boats. The latter group will be included in the unit. San Pedro and Los Angeles harbor.-The work in the port is done by the registered longshoremen and the permit men. The latter group consists of men who are given work after the regular long- shoremen have all been sent out. In the past these men made their living exclusively or substantially from longshore work, but at the present time work is slack and less than half of the men are receiv- ing any work. Men on the,permit list come and go; there is no indi- cation that these men are now anything more than casuals. They will not be included in the unit. ii The list contains 75 names Only. 36 cards , altogether, were introduced into evidence Masson testified that he did not know of any longshoremen regularly employed in the last 6 months in Santa Barbara and Ventura harbors who did not sign cards. It appears likely, therefore, that the list, which was submitted, pursuant to agreement, after' the bearing had ended, contains many names of extra men However, for the purpose of determining the question of majority , this list will be taken as accurate. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1031 The cards of registered longshoremen that have been introduced into evidence have been compared with the list of longshoremen fur- nished to the Board by counsel for Waterfront Employers Associa- tion of Southern California and 2,209 cards were found to be signed by men on that list. There are 2,655 registered longshoremen. The signing of the cards was witnessed by Ernest Bowen, president of I. L. W. U. Local 1-13, and Elmer Mevert, a member of the Local. These men knew most of the longshoremen personally. In case of doubt the signers were asked for their union membership books, so that their signatures could be compared. I. L. W. U. Local 1-13 has about 2,516 members. It received its charter on October 7, 1937. Prior to that time the men had been in I. L. A. Local 38-82 which had some 2,640 members. The officials of I. L. A. Local 38-82 had been restrained by Court action from joining with the I. L. W. U. They, together with about 14 men who desired to remain in the I. L. A., and about 100 more men, stayed in I. L. A. Local 38-82, which had been restrained by the Courts from affiliating itself with the C. I. O. The 100 men re- Imained in the I. L. A. Local "to protect the interests of the other 2,500." The cards included the cards signed by the men who have remained in the I. L. A. Local. Everett, Washington.-The work in the Port of Everett is per- formed by the 258 longshoremen whose names appear on the list furnished by counsel for Waterfront Employers of Seattle. There are some called "permit men" who do work occasionally but they are not earning enough to support themselves and depend largely on other sources for their livelihood. They will not be included in the unit. Two hundred twenty-five of the registered longshoremen signed the cards. H. F. McKennlnan, the dispatcher at Everett, stated that I. L. W. U. Local 1-32 calve into existence as such in September 1937. Since then, the Labor Relations Committee has continued to func- tion in the same way. The longshoremen are represented on the Committee by I. L. W. U. men; the companies have two local repre- sentatives and Ringenberg, of the Waterfront Employers of Seattle, on the Committee. There has been no change in the way the hiring hall has been operated. Dailey, who is the representative of the Employers Association in the Port, places the orders for longshore- men for all of the four or five companies which require longshore work in the port. Before the change in affiliation, the Local was I. L. A. Local 38-76. There are no I. L. A. men in Everett at the present time. 106791-33-vol vii-66 1032 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Aberdeen, Washington.33-Cards presented from the Port of Aber- deen were witnessed by Joseph Kit Koski and Les Lambert, who knew each of the signers personally. The work in the port is per- formed by the registered longshoremen of whom there are 386. One hundred seventy-five cards signed by registered longshoremen were presented in evidence. More cards have not been signed because of a rumor to the effect that signature would prevent the aliens, mostly Finns who were longshoremen in the port, from getting their citizen- ship papers, and because many of the longshoremen took the position that they had already voted to affiliate with the C. I. 0., that they had their I. L. W. U. books, and that further signing of cards was unnecessary. The men in the port are dispatched through the same hiring hall they have had since 1934. The dispatcher is\an I. L. W. U. member. The Labor Relations Committee in the port consists of four repre- sentatives from the companies, including Ringenberg, of Waterfront Employers of Seattle, and four representatives of the Union. Since the coming into existence of I. L. W. U. Local 1-24, there has been no change in the way labor relations with the companies have been carried on. The men were formerly organized in I. L. A. Local 38-77. There are now no I. L. A. men in the port. Port Gamble and Poulsbo, Washington.`.'-Tile work in Port Gamble is done by the 55 registered longshoremen named in the list of registered longshoremen submitted by Gregory Harrison. Fifty cards signed by these longshoremen were submitted in evidence. These cards were witnessed by William F. Falkner and Ward King, both of whom knew all the signers personally. Since the change of affiliation, there has been no difference in the way labor relations in the port are handled. The men who did the work in the port were formerly members of I. L. A. Local 38-88; -they are now members of I. L. W. U. Local 1-51. Port Townsend, Washington.-The work in the port is done by the registered longshoremen and eight men who had been working in Ludlow," where operations have ceased. These eight men, who derive their livelihood from longshore work, are dispatched from the hiring hall in Port Townsend after the registered longshoremen have been sent out. Thirty-two cards signed by registered longshoremen and Ludlow men 36 were introduced into evidence. There are 28 registered longeshoremen. Al The port is at Grays Harbor, which is centrally located between the towns of Hoquiam and Aberdeen. Poit Gamble is 7 miles from the town of Poulsbo. Port Ludlow is 20 miles from Port Townsend by road or by water. 31 The ei °ht Ludlow men are Martin Parkko , Neil Stark , Oscar W. Henningson, George Zvoodley, Francis Patsy, Joseph Patsy , Alfred Eldridge, and William Woodley. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1033 Four of the persons named on the list of registered longshore- men in Port Townsend have been transferred and are no longer ac- tive longshoremen. They are P. Popowinski, C; Biewater, R. Ely, and H. Olsen. The change in name and affiliation from I. L. A. Local 38-96 to I. L. W. U. Local 1-55 did not result in any change in the manner in which labor relations with employers are conducted. There are no I. L. A. men doing longshore work at the present time at Port Ludlow or Port Gamble. Raymond, Washington.-The longshore work at Raymond is per- formed by the 116 registered longshoremen operating on a list of registered longshoremen at Willapa Harbor'37 and casual workers. It is impossible for a casual worker to make his living at longshore work; they do longshore work along with various other odd jobs they can pick up. They will not be included in the unit. One hundred seven cards signed by registered longshoremen and witnessed by Jack Price, who was at one time the dispatcher, and Bissenger, the present dispatcher, both of whom knew each of the signers personally, were introduced into evidence. All the longshoring work is performed by members of I. L. W. U. Local 1-1. The present membership of the Local is substantially the same as the membership of I. L. A. Local 38-92, prior to the change in name and affiliation; there is no I. L. A. Local now functioning in Port Raymond. The coming into existence of Local 1-1 did not result in any change in the planner in which labor relations are maintained, other than a decision to have the Labor Relations Committee meet every 30 clays instead of irregularly. The three workers' representatives on the Labor Relations Committee are members of the I. L. W. U. Local. Seattle, Wallington.-The longshore work in the Port is per- formed by registered loigshoremen, permit men, registered dock men, and grain handlers. Permit men are men who have not yet been admitted to the Union, although they will eventually become Union members. There is a separate board in, the hiring hall for then. They contribute to the maintenance of the hiring hall, make their living exclusively by longshore work, and up until the recent slack period, have spent most of their time working as longshoremen. Grain handlers are not registered longshoremen. They are men who do their own work first and are then sent out to do longshore work if they are needed. There is no indication that their long- shore work is in any way regular and they will be excluded from the unit. 37 Willapa harbor is a consolidated Port for the towns of Raymond and South Bend. The Port of Willapa Harbor is centrally located between the two towns. 1034 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Frank Smith, vice president of I. L. W. U. Local 1-19, and at one time a dispatcher, witnessed cards of registered longshoremen and permit men. He testified that he knew each of the signers. Dewey Bennett,38 secretary of I. L. W. U. Local 1-19, and Thomas R. Richardson, president, also witnessed cards and testified as to the authenticity of the signatures. A list of the registered longshoremen, dock men and permit men in Seattle contains 1,511 names.39 One thousand three hundred forty-three of these men signed cards. I. L. W. U. Local 1-19 is functioning under the old I. L. A. Local 38-12 constitution which they have changed in minor respects. The hiring hall has four I. L. W. U. dispatchers and is jointly main- tained. The Local has used the same minute book from August 16, 1934, to March 3, 1938. There is no I. L. A. Local in Seattle whose members do any of the longshore work at the port. Vancouver, Washington.-The longshore work in the Port of Van- couver is done by longshoremen hired through the hiring hall. No longshore work is performed by members of any I. L. A. Local. The list of registered' longshoremen includes grain handlers and dock workers. H. Mason, dispatcher at the hiring hall, checked the names of individuals on the roster of Vancouver longshoremen who are not regular longshoremen. Most of the names checked are those of casual workers. Fred Brown and H. Hopson have transferred from the Local. Of the 95 regular longshoremen, known personally to Mason, 87 signed cards which he witnessed. Reedsport, Oregon.40-All longshore work in the Port is now per- formed by members of I. L. W. U. Local 1-48 or by permit men who have put in applications to join the Union. When a boat- comes into the dock, the captain or the mate of the ship tells the dispatcher, E. E. Doyle, a member of the Union, how many men he wants and the dispatcher telephones the men. There is no list of registered men for the Port. Waterfront Em- ployers Association of San Francisco supplied a list containing 28 names of longshoremen and permit men who are to be included in the unit. Twenty-three of these men signed cards witnessed by Tom Richman, secretary of the Local. He knows each of the men personally. Rainier, Oregon.-No longshore work is performed in Rainier ex- cept by men hired from the hiring hall, which is jointly maintained by the employers and by the I. L. W. U. There is no I. L. A. Local ss Bennett referred to "service men " From his description of that group , it Is evident that he was referring to "permit men " 30 Twelve men are deceased They have not been counted. 40 Reedsport is on Winchester Bay, about 28 miles from Coos Bay. Occasionally when help is needed , Coos Bay Local sends to Reedsport for extra men. I DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1035 in Rainier whose members perform longshore work in the Port. Ray Williams, president of I. L. W. U. Local 1-45, which was, before the change in affiliation, I. L. A. Local 38-81, testified with respect to a list of longshoremen in the Port, that C. Girt, Byron Hirtzell, H. Jessee, and J. Rauch are casuals, A. Bustrim has quit longshoring work and John Bitte, while still a member of the Local, has not been working for a long period. Excluding these persons, 29 longshore- men are named on the list. Twenty-seven cards witnessed by Ray Williams were introduced. Williams knew the signers to be the per- sons whose names appear on the cards. His own card was witnessed by Marvin Girt, secretary of the Local. Astoria, Oregon.-The work in the Port is performed by regis- tered longshoremen and dock workers. The dock workers do the trucking on the dock when a ship comes in for salmon or flour. Al- though the dock workers are regular members of the Union, they do not work under the longshore arrangement and will therefore be excluded from the unit. The list of registered longshoremen and dock workers has been checked by A. Williams, a member of I. L. W. U. Local 1-50, which was, prior to the change in affiliation, I. L. A. Local 38-85. He has put a small "d" in front of the name of each dock worker, and a check mark in front of casual workers who do not make their living at longshore work and who are not to be in- cluded in the unit. There are 178 registered longshoremen. Ninety of these men signed cards. North Bend, Oregon.-One hundred thirty-three cards signed by longshoremen who earn their living exclusively in longshore work in North Bend were witnessed by E. V. Schults, the recording secre- tary of I. L. W. U. Local 1-12. He was sure of the identity of each of the signers. The work in the Port is performed by I. L. W. U. members and permit men who are not members of the Union but who earn their living primarily or exclusively from longshore work in North Bend. Schults has gone through the list of Coos Bay longshoremen 41 and has put a check mark in front of the name of each person on the list who is not now a,regular Coos Bay longshoreman. There are 140 names without checks.42 St. Helens, Oregon.-C. Kremer, secretary of I. L. W. U. Local 1-68 at St. Helens, and C. Stewart, a member, put check marks in front of the names of casual workers who do not customarily make a living at longshore work, which appear on a list of St. Helens long- shoremen prepared by Waterfront Employers of Portland. J. F. 41 Noith Bend is on Coos Bay Harbor. 42 Witness believed that there were other men working as longshoremen who are not on the list which was furnished by counsel for the companies, but the Union did not object to the use of the list. 1036 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Brown, whose name appears on the list, has died. C. Schmidt is an injured longshoreman who occasionally works a day or sometimes two or three days. He belongs to the Local. He will be included in the unit; casual workers will not be included. Forty-one cards witnessed by Kremer and Stewart were intro- duced. Both witnesses knew the persons signing the cards to be the persons whose names appear on the cards. There are 73 persons on the list whose names were not checked. Longview, Washington.-Dewey Van Brunt, the dispatcher at the hiring hall in Longview, checked through the roster of Long- view longshoremen and put a check mark in front of the name of each person who is not a regular longshoreman. One hundred sev- enty-five of the 235 regular longshoremen signed cards. Van Brunt, who witnessed the signing of the cards, testified that he was per- sonally acquainted with each of the signers. Bandon and Port Orford, Oregon.`-The torrential rains in the vicinity of Portland made it impossible for the men who could have testified with respect to the cards signed by the longshoremen in these two ports to get to the hearing. An exhibit in the form of a letter from the Waterfront Employers of San Francisco lists 21 longshoremen and 5 permit men who work at Bandon. Newport, Oregon.44-D. Harding, who witnessed the signing of the cards by Newport longshoremen, is an invalid and was unable to leave his home to attend the hearing. The Trial Examiner ruled that an affidavit by Harding concerning these cards was inadmissible. Portland, Oregon.-The persons doing longshore work in Port- land are classified as longshoremen, dock workers, grain handlers, miscellaneous workers, permit men, and Garibaldi men. The miscellaneous group includes those who tie and untie ships and a few sweepers. They are not classified as regular longshore- men, and, since the record contains no further information concern- ing them, they must be excluded from the unit. The Garibaldi men are those who used to work in the Port of Garibaldi which has been closed down because of sand drifting into the Port. The District prorated the longshoremen in the Port and 13 of them work in Portland. They will be included in the unit. The grain handlers operate under a separate contract. However, they plug in on the same board as do the regular longshoremen. They do both grain work and regular longshoring work; they are required to take the grain job first, if there is any available. The usual bill of lading provides for the delivery of grain by the terminal or the 4"Port Orford has a population of 300 and is located approximately 30 miles south of Bandon "Newport is a port on Yaquina Bay, about half way between the Columbia River and Coos Bay. It is a town with approximately 1,530 people. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1037 shipper to the ship's side, rather than to the first place of rest on a ship's dock, as usually in the case of other cargo. The grain handler thus is a longshoreman with respect to the grain, carrying the grain to the ship if the grain is sacked, or operating the grail elevator or belt to the ship's side. When there is no grain work these men do regular longshoring work. The roster of longshoremen submitted by Water- front Employers of Portland puts longshoremen, dock workers, and grain handlers together in one list. The grain handlers will be in- cluded in the unit. Dock workers have a separate board in the hiring hall on which to plug in. Formerly their function was to transfer the cargoes from the railroad cars or trucks to the dock floor. For this they were paid 85 cents an hour. During the last 2 years, however, the" method of operation has changed and lift machines and lift boards are used. The lift machines have a hoist running in front of car- riers. The lift board is brought to the cargo and the cargo is placed on it. The machine then carries it to the ship's sling, the sling is put under the cargo, and the cargo is lifted to the boat. Work with this new method is classified as longshore work and the dock workers receive regular longshoremen's pay for doing it. Ninety per cent of the work done by dock workers is now classified as longshore work. Besides, dock workers also do the same type of work that longshoremen not classified as dock workers do; they are sent out on this work after the men on the "big board," which is the regular longshoremen's and grain handlers' board, have been sent out. Dock workers will be included in the unit. Permit men will also be included. The lists supplied by, Waterfront Employers of Portland name 1,099 longshoremen, including grain handlers and dock workers and 126 permit men. Seven hundred seventy-four cards were presented in evidence. The witnesses to the signing of the cards testified that they either knew the men personally, checked the signatures on the cards with the signatures on the Union book, or in the case of permit men, called in mutual friends when they were not sure of the identity of the signer. Bellingham, Washington.-The longshore work at Bellingham is performed by the 159 men named on a list furnished by Gregory Harrison. One hundred thirty-seven of these men signed cards wit- nessed by John Mallahan, secretary-treasurer of I. L. W. U. Local 1-7, who knew each of the signers personally. After the change in affiliation of the Bellingham Local, they con- tinued to use the same quarters, the same minute book and the same equipment in the hall. - 1038 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Action had been taken by the Local in January or February 1938 to the effect that anyone who did not sign a card would not be permitted to work for one week. Phil Taylor and Herman Dale tried to start an I. L. A. Local and applied to the I. L. A. for a charter. Local 1-7 fined both these men $150 because of their activities. Dale has been injured since July 27, 1937, and has been unable to work. Taylor was not given any work after the fine had been imposed-be- cause he refused to pay the fine. L. B. Sulgrove, counsel for the I. L. A., stated that his purpose in introducing the testimony of Dale and Taylor was to show the method used to obtain the pledge cards and stated that more testimony was not introduced because men who testified would not be given any work. It is only necessary to note that the action taken against Dale and 'Taylor was not because of failure to sign the cards, but because of their attempt to start an I. L. A. Local, that any action with re- spect to failure to sign was action taken by a majority of the Local, and that the secret ballot in the June 1937 referendum on the ques- tion of C. I. O. affiliation resulted in a vote of 124 to 12 in favor of such affiliation. Tacoma, Washington.-The list 45 of registered longshoremen and registered dock workers at Tacoma contains 662 names. Olympia, Washington.-The list 45 of registered longshoremen and permit men in Olympia contains 170 names. Anacortes, Washington.-The list" of registered longshoremen in Anacortes contains 44 names. Port Angeles, Washington.-The list 45 of the registered longshore- men in Port Angeles contains 114 names. Eagle Harbor and Freeland, Washington.-The list of the long- shoremen in Eagle Harbor and Freeland was furnished by the com- panies and contained 72 names. Crescent City, California.-All the longshore work in this Port is performed by the 13 men who signed the cards. All but William 'Gettings earn their livelihood exclusively as longshoremen. Gettings works as an extra. He will not be included in the unit. The list of registered longshoremen and permit men at Crescent City contains 15 names. Monterey, California.-A. Martin, Gallego, a longshoreman in Monterey, stated that there are only 17 longshoremen in the port and that other men who know how to do longshore work are called in when needed. The list submitted by Waterfront Employers Asso- ciation of San Francisco, however, contains 77 names. On this state .of the record, the list of the Association will be taken as accurate. 4 Each of these lists has been submitted by the companies. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1039 Gallego witnessed the signatures of eight men whom he knew per- sonally. Gallego also identified the signature of Felix Urquida whose card was witnessed by M. B. Brown. Gallego could not identify the signatures of seven other men and this group of seven cards will not be considered. Eureka, California.-Because the roads between Eureka and San Francisco had been washed out it was impossible for anyone who could authenticate the cards signed in the Port of Eureka to get to the hearing. A list of the longshoremen and "extras" in the Port of Eureka was presented in evidence. The "extras" are, in fact, per- mit men who are called upon after the regular longshoremen have been sent out. They will be included in the unit. The list contains 52 names. San Francisco, California.-The hiring hall in San Francisco cov- ers the San Francisco Bay region. Men work either on the "pre- ferred" gangs which work for one company nearly all the time, or on "casual" gangs which may be dispatched to any employer at any time. There are 85 preferred gangs and 85 casual gangs in the port. The word "casual," in San Francisco, does not mean that a long- shoreman is only occasionally employed but is used to distinguish the men on the casual gangs from those on the preferred gangs. There are also longshoremen in San Francisco who work from the "plug board," and who are used to fill vacancies in either preferred or casual gangs. The plug board is a board with a series of holes numbered in order. Longshoremen who work from the plug board are provided with a plug which is about 2 inches long and is of the thickness of a lead pencil and which bears a number corresponding with the number on the brass check which each longshoreman carries. The longshoreman puts his plug in the lowest numbered available hole and is sent out after all the men whose plugs preceded his have been sent out. There are two types of permit men; those who are registered long- shoremen and are not yet members of the Union, and those who are neither members of the Union nor registered longshoremen but who are working on permits issued by the joint Labor Relations Com- mittee. , The longshoremen in all of the afore-mentioned groups are to be included in the unit. There are 4,039 names on the list of registered longshoremen at SanFrancisco and 345 permit men. Three thousand four hundred ninety-four cards of registered longshoremen and 289 cards of permit men, signed by men named on the list, and properly authenticated, were introduced into evidence. Except in the case of a few cards, the cards are stamped "regis- tered," indicating registered longshoremen; "member," indicating a 1040 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD member of the Union; and "approved," indicating that the card is that of a permit man who is neither registered nor a member of the Union but who is entitled to work out of the hiring hall. Summary Port Cards Total number of em- ployees Port Cards Total number of em- ployees San Diego------------------------ 93 116 Bandon------------------------- -------- 26 Santa Barbara, Ventura and vi- Port Orford_______________________ ________ ________ cmity-------------------------- 32 75 Nen port------------------------ -------- -------- San Pedro and Los Angeles Har- Portland________________________ 774 1,099 bor----------------------------- 2,209 2,695 Bellingham ----------------------- 137 159 Everett___________________________ 225 258 Tacoma-------------------------- -------- 6,2 Aberdeen- 175 386 Olympia------------------------- -------- 170 Port Gamble and Poulsbo_ 50 55 Anacortes________________________ ________ 44 PortTownsend___________________ 4632 4636 Port Angeles_____________________ ________ 114 Raymond________________________ 107 116 Eagle Harbor_____________________ ________ 39 Seattle____________________________ 1,343 1,511 Freeland ------------------------- ----- 33 Vancouver________________________ 87 95 Crescent City____________________ 12 15 Reedsport------------------------ 23 28 Monterey ------------------------ 9 77 Rainier--------------------------- 27 29 Eureka-------------------------- -------- 52 Astoria___________________________ North Bend 90 133 178 140 San Francisco____________________ 3,783 - 4,384 ______________________ St Helens________________________ 41 73 Total_______________________ - 9,557 12,880 Longview________________________ 175 235 46 This figure includes the eight Ludlow men. The summary indicates that of the 12,850 longshoremen in the ap- propriate unit-, 9,557 have signed cards designating International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, District No. 1, as their representative for purposes of collective bargaining. We find that International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, District No. 1, has been designated and selected by the major- ity of the longshoremen in the appropriate unit as their representa- tive for the purposes of collective bargaining. It is, therefore, the exclusive representative of all the longshoremen in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, and we will so certify. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record of the case, the Board makes the following : CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre- sentation of longshoremen in the Pacific Coast ports of the United States, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The workers who do the longshore work in the Pacific Coast ports of the United States for the companies which are members of Waterfront Employers of Seattle, Waterfront Employers of Port- land, Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco, Water- front Employers Association of Southern California, and Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast, constitute a unit appropriate for the DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1041 purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act. 3. International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, Dis- trict No. 1, is the exclusive representative of all the workers in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act. CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES 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, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended, IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, District No. 1, has been designated and se- lected by a majority of the workers who do longshore work in the Pacific Coast ports of the United States for the companies which are members of Waterfront Employers of Seattle, Waterfront Em- ployers of Portland, Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco, Waterfront Employers Association of Southern Cali- forma, and Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast, as their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9 (a) of the Act, International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, District No. 1, is the exclusive representative of all such workers for the purposes of col- lective bargaining, in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employ- ment and other conditions of employment. APPENDIX A 1. International Longshore- men's a n d Warehouse- men's U n i o n, District No. 1. 2. Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast. 3. Waterfront Employers As- sociation of the Pacific Coast. 4. Waterfront Employers of Seattle. 5. Waterfront Employers of Portland. 6. Waterfront Employers Asso- ciation of San Francisco. 7. Waterfront Employers Asso- ciation of Southern Cali- fornia. 8. International Long s h o r e- men's Association , District No. 38. 9. International Longshore- men's & Warehousemen's Union, Local 1-13. 10. Mr. A. H. Petersen. 11. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-82, Inc. 12. Ainsworth & Dunn Dock Co. 13. Alaska Steamship Company. 1042 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD '14. Albina Dock Company. 15. American Foreign S. S. Corp. - 16. American - Hawaiian S. S. Co. 17. American Mail Line. 18. Ames Terminal Company. 19. Anderson & Middleton Lum- ber Co. 20. Angle - Canadian Shipping Co. 21. Arlington Dock Company. 22.' Arrow Stevedore Co. 23. Associated Banning Co. 24. Associated Banning Con2- pany (Berth 146). 25. Balfour, Guthrie & Co. 26. Barber Line. 27. Baxter & Company. 28. Beadle Steamship Co. Ltd. 29. Blue Funnel Line. 30. Blue Star Line. 31. Border Line Transportation Co. 32. Brady-Hamilton Steve. Co. 33. Bulk Carriers Corp. 34. Burns Steamship Company. 35. California Steve. & Ballast Co. 36. Canadian Transport Co. 37. Cargill, Incorporated. 38. Chamberlin S. S. Co. Ltd. 39. W. R. Chamberlin & Co. 40. Coastal Steamship Co. 41. Coastwise Line. 42. Columbia River Steve. Co. 43. Consolidated Olympic Line. 44. Coos Bay Lumber Company. 45. Crescent Wharf & Ware- house Co. 46. Deming, Roberg & Williams. 47. Dispatch Steve. & Cont. Co. 48. •Dodwell Dock & Whse. Co., Inc. 49. Dollar Steamship Lines. 50. Dollar Steamship Lines Inc., Ltd. 51. Donaldson Line. 52. Donaldson Line (Balfour, Guthrie & Co.). 53. Katherine Donovan S. S. Co. 54. Donovan Lumber Co. 55. East Asiatic Company. 56. East Waterway D o c k & Whse. Co. 57. El Dorado Oil Works. 58. Elliott Bay Service Co. 59. Empire Lumber Co. 60. Everett Stevedoring Co. 61. S. S. Freeman Co. 62. French Line. 63. Fruit Express Line. 64. Furness (Pacific) Line. 65. General S. S. Corp. 66. General Steve. & Ballast Co. 67. Girdwood Shipping Com- pany. 68. Gorman Lumber Co. 68-A. Gorman Steamship Co. 69. Grace Lines, Inc. 70. W. R. Grace & Company. 71. Gray & Owners, S. S. Daisy. 72. Grays Harbor Stevedore Co. 73. Great Northern Railway. 74. Griffiths & Sprague Steve. 75. James Griffiths & Sons, Inc. 76. Hamburg-American Line. 77. Hammond Lumber Com- pany. 78. Hammond Shipping Co., Ltd. 79. J. R. Hanify Company. 80. Hart-Wood Lumber Co. 81. Chas. H. Higgins Co. 82. Hobbs-Wall & Company. 83. Holland-America Line. 84. Holmes Eureka Lumber Company. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 85i. Independent Stevedore Co. 86. International Steve. Co. 87. Interocean Line. 88. Interocean Steamship Corp., Ltd. 89. Interstate Terminals. 90. Italian Line. 91. Johnson Line. 92. A. B. Johnson Lumber Co. 93. W. J. Jones & Son. 94. The Jordan Company. 95. "K" Line. 96. Kerr S. S. Company, Ltd. 97. Kingsley Company of Cali- fornia. 98. The Kingsley Co. of Califor- nia. 99. Kingsley Navigation Co. 100. Kinney Shipping Company. 101. Kitsap Lumber Co. 102. Kitsap S. S. Company (San Pedro, Cal.). 102-A. Kitsap S. S. Company (Tacoma, Wash.). 103. Klaveness Line. 104. Knutsen Line. 105. Kolusai Kisen Kaisha. 106. J. Lauritzen Line. 107. Lawrence-Phillips Lumber Company. 108. Lawrence-Phillips S. S. Co. 109. Leslie Salt Company. 110. Mr. Fred Linderman. 111. L. A.-S. F. Navigation Co. 112. Luckenbach Gulf S. S. Co. 113. Luckenbach S. S. Company. 114. Luckenbach Gulf Steamship Co. 115. H. E. Mansfield, Inc. 116. Marine , Terminals Corp. (San Francisco). 117. Marine Terminals Corp. (Terminal Island. Cal.). 1043 118. J. E. Marshall, Inc. 119. Matson Navigation Co. 120. Matson Terminals, Inc. 121. Matthews & Owners, S. S. Daisy. 122. McCormick S. S. Co. 123. Metropolitan Stevedore Co. 124. Mitchell Stevedoring Co. 125. Mitsubishi Shojen Kaisha. 126. Mitsui & Co. 127. J. J. Moore & Co., Inc. 128. Moore S. S. Co. 129. N. Y. K. Line. 130. National S. S. Co. 131. Nippon Yusen Kaisha. 132. North German Lloyd. 133. North Pacific Coast Line. 134. Northern Stevedores, Inc. 135. Northland Transportation Co. 136. Norton , Lilly & Co. 137. Oceanic Terminals. 138. John C. Ogden. 139. Fred Olsen Line. 140. The Olsen Line, Inc. 141. Fred Olson Line. 142. Oliver J. Olson & Co. 143. Olympia Stevedoring Com- pany. 144. Olympic Steamship Co., Inc. 145. Olympic Stevedoring Co. 146. Oregon Stevedoring Co. 147. Outer Harbor Dock & Wharf Co. 148. Owens-Parks Lumber Co. 149. P. L. Transportation Co. 150. Pacific Argentine B r a z i l Line. 151. Pacific-Atlantic S. S. Co. 152. Pacific Java Bengal Line. 153. Pacific Lighterage Corp. 154. Pacific Steve. & Ballasting Co. 1044 NATIONAL LAHOH RELATIONS BOARD 155. Panama Mail S. S. Company. 156. Paramino Lumber Co. 157. Portland Stevedoring Co. 158. Powell Shipping Company. 159. Prince Line. 160. Prince Line, Ltd. 161. Puget Sound Stevedoring Co. 162. Quaker Line. 163. Capt. J. Ramselius. 164. Redwood Steamship Co. 165. E. L. Reitz Lumber Com- pany. 166. Reitz S. S. Co. 167. Rothschild - International Steve. Co. 168. Royal Mail Lines. 169. Royal Mail Lines, Ltd. 170. Salmon Terminals, Inc. 171. San Francisco Steve. Co. 172. Santa Ana S. S. Co. 173. Schafer Bros. Steamship Company. 174. Schafer Bros. S. S. Lines. 175. Schafer B r o s. Steamship Lines. 176. Schirmer Stevedoring Co. 177. Seaboard Steve. Company. 178. Seaboard Steve. Corp. 179. Seaboard Stevedoring Corp. 180. Seaboard Steve. Corp. of Wash. 181. Shepard S. S. Company. 182. Sivertsen J. Martin Steve. Co. 183. States S. S. Co. 184. Soto Shipping Company, P. F. 185. Southland Steamship Co. 186. Southwestern Stevedoring Co. 187. Sudden & Christenson. 188 Stipple Docks, Inc. 189., Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd. 190. Transatlantic S. S. Co. 191. Transpacific Transporta- tion Co. 192. Twin Harbor Stevedoring Co. 193. Union Sulphur Co. 194. United Fruit Co. 195. United Ocean Transport Co., Ltd. 196. Viking Steamship Co. 197. Virginia Dock & Trading Co. 198. Washington Stevedoring Co. 199. Frank Waterhouse & Co. of Can. Ltd. 200. Western Stevedore Co. 201. Westfal-Larson Co. Line. 202. Weyerhaeuser S. S. Line. 203. Wheeler-Hallock Co. 204. Willapa Harbor Stevedor- ing Co. 205. E. K. Wood Lumber Co. 206. Wamashita Shipping Co. (Portland, Ore.) 207. Wamashita Shipping Co. (Seattle, Wash.) 208. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-142. 209. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-114. 210. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-97. 211. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-83. 212. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-86. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 213. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-89. 214. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-78. 215. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-82. 216. International Longshore- men's Association, Local 38-79. 217. International Longshore- men's Association, Dis- trict No. 38. 218. P. W. Walker. 219. R. A. Patterson. 220. C. H. Lindegren. 221. C. H. Lindegren. 222. M. D. Rogers. 223. Elmer Bruce. 224. O . M. Benton. 225. A. L. Bebo. 226. W. J. Hale. 227. Jack Edwardson. 228. J . O. Bowlbey. 229. Joe Sumpton. APPENDIX B SHIPOWNERS' ASSOCIATION Anderson & Middleton Lumber Co. Baxter & Co., J. H. Beadle Steamship Co., Ltd. Burns Steamship Co. Chamberlin & Co., W. R. Coastal Steamship Co. Coastwise Steamship & Barge Co. Consolidated Olympic Line. Coos Bay Lumber Co. Dispatch Stev. & Cont. Co. (Empire Lumber Co., char- terers.) Donovan Lumber Co. Freeman & Co., S. S. Gorman Lumber Co. Griffiths & Sons, James, Inc. (Griffiths Steamship Co.) Hammond Shippln; Co., Ltd. Hanify Co., J. R. P1art-Wood Lumber Co. Higgins, Chas. H. Hobbs. Wall & Co. 1045 Johnson Lumber Co., A. B, Kingsley Company of California. Kitsap Lumber Co. Lawrence-Philips Steamship Co. Linderman, Fred. L. A.-S. F. Navigation Co. McCormick Steamship Co. Moore Steamship Co. National Steamship Co. Olson Line, Inc. (Olson & Co., Oliver J.) Owens-Parks Lumber Co. P. L. Transportation Co. Paramino Lumber Co. Ramselius, Capt. J.' Redwood Steamship Co. Reitz Steamship Co. Schafer Bros. Steamship Lines. Sudden & Christenson. Southland Steamship Co. Wheeler-Hallock Co. Wood Lumber Co., E. K. 1046 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD APPENDIX C WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF THE PACIFIC COAST SHIPPING MEMBERS Alaska Steamship Company. American Foreign S. S. Corp. American Hawaiian S. S. Co. American Mail Line. Anglo-Canadian Shipping Co. Barber Line. Baxter & Company. Blue Funnel Line. Blue Star Line. Bulk Carriers Corp. Burns 'Steamship Company. Canadian Transport Co. ,Chamberlin S. S. Co. Ltd. Coastal Steamship Co. Coastwise Line. Consolidated Olympic Line. Coos Bay Lumber Company. Donaldson Line. 11^atherine Donovan S. S. Co. East Asiatic Company. Empire Lumber Co. S. S. Freeman Co. French Line. Fruit Express Line. Furness (Pacific) Line. General S. S. Corp. AGirclwood Shipping Company. Gorman Steamship Co. Grace Lines, Inc. James Griffiths & Sons, Inc. Hamburg-American Line. Hammond Shipping Co., Ltd. J. R. Hanify Company. Hart-Wood Lumber Co. Chas. H. Higgins Co. TIobbs-Wall & Company. Holland-America Line. Interocean Line. ,-Italian Line. Johnson Line. A. B. Johnson Lumber Co. "K" Line. Kerr S. S. Company, Ltd. Kingsley Navigation Co. Kitsap S. S. Company (Tacoma, Wash.) Kitsap S. S. Company (San Pe- dro, Cal.) Klaveness Line. Knutson Line. Kokusai Kisen Kaisha. Lauritzen Line, J. Lawrence-Phillips S. S. Co. Mr. Fred Linderman. Luckenbach S. S. Company. Matson Navigation Co. McCormick S. S. Co. Mitsui & Co. Moore S. S. Co. National S. S. Co. North German Lloyd. Northland Transportation Co. Norton, Lilly & Co. N. Y. K. Line. John C. Ogden. Fred Olsen Line. Oliver J. Olson & Co. Olsen Line, Inc. Owens-Parks Lumber Co. Pacific-Atlantic S. S. Co. (Quaker Line). Panama Mail S. S. Company. Paramino Lumber Co. P. L. Transportation Co. Prince Line, Ltd. Capt. J. Ramselius. Reitz S. S. Co. Royal Mail Lines, Ltd. DECISIONS AND ORDERS Santa Ana S. S. Co. Schafer Bros. S. S. Lines. Schafer Bros. Steamship Lines. Shepard S. S. Company. States S. S. Co. Sudden & Christenson. Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd. Transatlantic S. S. Co. Transpacific Transportation Co. Union Sulphur Co. 1047 United Fruit Co. United Ocean Transport Co., Ltd. Viking Steamship Co. Frank Waterhouse & Co. of Can- ada, Ltd.' Westfal-Larson Co. Line. Weyerhaeuser S. S. Line. Wheeler-Hallock Co. Wood Lumber Co., E. K. Yamashita Shipping Co. ASSOCIATE MEMBERS Ainsworth & Dunn Dock Com- Interstate Terminals. pany. W. J. Jones & Son Inc. Albina Dock Company. The Jordan Company. Ames Terminal Company. Leslie Salt Company. Arlington Dock Company. Longview Stevedoring Company. Associated Banning Company. H. E. Mansfield Inc. B. & H. Stevedoring Corp. Marine Terminals Corp. Bellingham Contracting & Steve- Mitchell Stevedoring Co. doring Co. Mitchell Stevedoring Company. Brady Hamilton Stevedore. Northern Stevedores Inc. Cargill Incorporated. Oceanic Terminals. Columbia Basin Terminals. Olympia Stevedoring Co. Columbia R i v e r Stevedoring Olympic Stevedore Co. Company. Oregon Stevedoring Company. Deming, Roberg & Williams, Inc. Pacific Stevedoring & Ballasting Dispatch Stevedore & Contracting' Co. Company. Dodwell Dock & Warehouse Co. East Waterway Dock & Ware- house Co. El Dorado Terminal Co. Elliott Bay Service Company. Everett Stevedoring Company. General Stevedore & Ballast Co. Grays Harbor Stevedore Com- pany. Griffiths & Sprague Stevedoring Co. Independent Stevedore Company. International Stevedoring Com- pany. Portland Stevedoring Co. Powell Shipping Co. Puget Sound Stevedoring Co. Rothschild International Steve. Co. Salmon Terminals. The San Francisco Stevedoring Co. Stevedore Service Co. Supple Docks Inc. Thomas & Kear. Twin Harbor Stevedoring Co., Washington Stevedoring Co. Western Stevedore Co. Willapa Harbor Stevedoring Co. 106791-38-vol. Vn-67 1048 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOATID APPENDIX D WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS OF SEATTLE MEMBERSHIP LIST DEC. 7, 1937 Ainsworth & Dunn Dock Co. Alaska Steamship Company. Ames Terminal Company. American Foreign S. S. Corp. (Matthewson Shipping Co., Agents). American - Hawaiian Steamship Co. American Mail Line. Anglo-Canadian Shipping Co. (Girdwood Shipping, Co., Agents). Arlington Dock Company. Arrow Line. (Sudden & Christenson.) Blue Funnel Line. (Dodwell & Co., Ltd., Agents.) Blue Star Line, Inc. Border Line Transportation Co. Canadian Transport Company. (Paul A. Umoff, Agent.) Cargill, Incorporated. Coastal Steamship Company. Coastwise Line. Deming, Roberg & Williams. Dodwell Dock & Whse. Co., Inc. Donaldson Line. (Balfour, Guthrie & Co.) East Asiatic Company, Inc. East Waterway Dock & Whse. Co. Elliott Bay Service Co. Everett Stevedoring Co. Fred Olson Line. (Girdwood Shipping Co., . Agents.) French Line. (General S. S. Co.) Fruit Express Line. (International Pacific Coast Corp.) Furness (Pacific) Ltd. (Burchard & Fisken, Agents.) Girdwood Shipping Co. Grace Line (W. R. Grace & Co.). Grays Harbor Stevedore Co. Great Northern Ry. Griffiths & Sprague Stevedoring. Griffiths, James & Son. Hamburg-American Line. (Sudden & Christenson.) Hammond Shipping Co. Johnson Line of Stockholm. (W. R. Grace & Co.) Jordan, The Company. Kingsley Co. of California. Kerr S. S. Co. (Silver Java Pa- cific). (Burchard & Fisken, Agents.) Klaveness Line. (Sudden & Christenson.) Knutsen Line. (Interocean S. S. Corp.) Lauritzen Line, J. (Girdwood Shipping C o . , Agents.) Leslie Salt Co. Libera Line. (General S. S. Co., Agents.) Luckenbach Gulf Steamship Co. Luckenbach Steamship Co., Inc. Matson Navigation Co. (Alexander & Baldwin.) Matson Terminals, Inc. Mitchell Stevedoring Co. DECISIONS AND ORDERS Moore, J. J. & Co., Inc. (W. L. Macquarrle, Agent.) McCormick Steamship Co. Mansfield, Inc., H. E. Nippon Yusen Kaisha. North German Lloyd. Northern Stevedores, Inc. Northland Transportation Co. Norton, Lilly & Co. (Agents for Isthmian S. S.) Olympia Stevedoring Company. Olympic Steamship Co., Inc. (Consolidated-Olympic S. S. Co.) Olympic Stevedoring Co. Pacific Java Bengal Line. (Burchard & Fisken, Agents.) Puget Sound Stevedoring Co. Quaker Line. Rothschild-International Steve. Co. 1049 Royal Mail Lines, Ltd. Salmon Terminals, Inc. Santa Ana Steamship Co. Seaboard Stevedoring Corp. of Wash. Shepard Steamship Company. Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd. Transatlantic S. S. Co., Ltd. (General S. S. Co.) Twin Harbor Stevedoring Co. Virginia Dock & Trading Co. Washington Stevedoring Co. Waterhouse, Frank & Co. of Can- ada. Western Stevedore Co. Westfal-Larsen Line. (General S. S. Co.) Weyerhaeuser Steamship Co. Willapa Harbor Stevedoring Co. Yamashita Shipping Co. APPENDIX E WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS OF PORTLAND MEMBERSHIP ROSTER AS OF FEBRUARY 3, 1938 American Hawaiian S. S. Co. American Mail Line. Anglo-Canadian S. S. Co. Balfour Guthrie & Co. Bulk Carriers Corp. Chamberlin S. S. Co. Coastwise Line. Fred. Olsen Line. French Line. Fruit Express Line. Furness (Pacific) Ltd. General Steamship Corp. Grace Line. Hammond Shipping Co., Ltd.- Italian Line. Johnson Line. Kerr Steamship Company. Kinney Shipping Company. J. Lauritzen Line. Luckenbacli Steamship Co. Matson Navigation Company. McCormick Steamship Co. North German Lloyd. North Pacific Coast Line. Pacific Argentine Brazil Line. Powell Shipping Company. Schafer Bros. S. S. Co. States Steamship Co. Sudden & Christenson. Swayne & Hoyt. Transpacific Trar sp. Co. Weyerhaeuser Steamship Co. Wheeler-Hallock Co. Yamashita Shipping Co. 1050 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD STEVEDORES Brady-Hamilton Steve. Oregon Stevedoring Co. International Steve. Co. Portland Stevedoring Co. W. J. Jones & Son. Seaboard Stevedoring Corp. STEVEDORES-OUTPORTS Columbia River Steve. Co. Independent Stevedore Co. DOCK OPERATORS Albina Dock Company. . Supple Docks, Inc. Interstate Terminals. Total-46 members. Oceanic Terminals. APPENDIX F MEMBERS OF WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO SHIPPING AND STEVEDORE MEMBERS American-Hawaiian SS Co. Arrow Stevedore Co. Associated Banning Co. 'Calif. Steve. & Ballast Co. Coos Bay Lumber Co. Dollar Steamship Lines. Donaldson Line,-Ltd. French Line. Furness (Pacific) Ltd. General Steamship Corp. General Steve. & Ballast Com- pany. Grace Line. Hamburg American Line. Holland America Line. Johnson Line. Kerr Steamship Company. Luckenbach SS Company. Luckenbach Gulf SS Co. Marine Terminals Corp. Matson Navigation Co. McCormick Steamship Co. North German Lloyd. Pacific Lighterage Corp. Mitchell Stevedoring Co. Panama Mail Steamship Co. San Francisco Steve. Co. Schirmer Stevedoring Co. Seaboard Steve. Corp. Sivertsen J. Martin Steve. Com- pany. Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd. Transpacific Transp. Co. United Fruit Company. ASSOCIATE MEMBERS Chamberlin, W. R. & Co. El Dorado Oil Works. Hammond Shipping Co., Ltd. The Kingsley Co. of Calif. Pacific Stevedoring & Ballasting Co. DECISIONS AND ORDERS APPENDIX G 1051 MEMBERSHIP ,LIST OF WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION .OP SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA DECEMBER 30, 1937 American Hawaiian Steamship Company. Arrow Line. (See Sudden &- Christenson.) Associated Banning Company. Bank Line. (See Marshall, Inc., J. E.) Barber Line : Barber Steamship Lines, Inc. Barber Wilhelmson Line. Baxter & Company, J. H. Blue Funnel Line (c/o Dodwell & Company). Blue Star Line. (See Marine Terminals Corp.) Calmar Line. (See Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.) Chamberlin Steamship Company, W. R. Coos Bay Lumber Company. Crescent Wharf & Warehouse -Company. Dollar Steamship Lines Inc., Ltd.: Tacoma & Oriental Steamship Company. Mexican Mail Steamship Company. French Line. (See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.) Fruit Express Line (c/o Dodwell & Company). Furness Line (c/o Furness (Pacific) Ltd.). General Steamship Corporation, Ltd.: French Line. Libera Line (Italian Line). Shepard Line. Silver Line. Transatlantic Steamship Company of Gothenberg. United Ocean Transport Company. Westfal Larsen Company. Silver Java Pacific Line Pacific Java Bengal Line. Kerr Steamship Company Grace & Company, W. R.: Panama Mail Steamship Company. Johnson Line. Gray & Owners, S. S. Daisy, c/o Freeman & Co., SS. Gulf Pacific Line. (See Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.) Gulf Pacific Mail Line. (See Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.) Hamburg-America Line. (See Sudden & Christenson.) 1052 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Hammond Lumber Company : Hammond Shipping, Company. Hanify, J. R. Holland-America Line, c/o Furness (Pacific) Ltd. Holmes Eureka Lumber Company (Redwood Steamship Company). Interocean Steamship Corp., Ltd.: Interocean Line. "K" Line (Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha). Knutsen Line. Pacific Coast Direct Line. Weyerhaeuser Steamship Company. Isbrandtsen-Moller (Maersk Line). (See Soto Shipping Co., P. F.) Johnson Line. (See Grace & Company, W. R.) "K" Line (Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha). (See Interocean Steamship Corp.) Kerr Steamship Company. (See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.) Kingsley Company of California, c/o McCormick Steamship Com- pany. Klaveness Line. (See Sudden & Christenson.) Knutsen Line. (See Interocean Steamship Corp.) Lawrence-Philips Lumber Company. Libera Line (Italian Line). (See General Steamship Corp.) Luckenbach Steamship Co., Inc.: Luckenbach Gulf Steamship Company. McCormick Steamship Company : McCormick Lumber Company, Chas. R. Marine Terminals Corp.: Blue Star Line. Marshall, Inc., J. E.: Bank Line. Matson Navigation Company : Matson Steamship Company. Matson Terminals Corp. Oceanic Steamship Company. Matthews & Owners, Daisy, c/o Freeman & Company, S. S. Metropolitan Stevedore Company. Mexican Mail Steamship Company. (See Dollar Steamship' Lines, Inc., Ltd.) Mitsubishi Shojen Kaisha, c/o Wickersham & Co., W. H. Nippon Yusen Kaisha. Oceanic Steamship Company. (See Matson Navigation Company.) Olsen Line, Fred. (See Soto Shipping Co., P. F.) Olson & Co., Oliver J. DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1053 Outer Harbor Dock & Wharf Company. P. L. Transportation Company (Pacific Lumber Company). Pacific Coast Direct Line. (See Interocean Steamship Corp.) Panama Mail Steamship Lines. ( See Grace & Co., W. R.) Prince Line, c/o Furness (Pacific) Ltd. Ramselius & Company, J. Reardon Smith Line. ( See Sudden & Christenson.) Reitz Lumber Company, E. L. Royal Mail Lines, c/o Furness (Pacific) Ltd. Schafer Bros. Steamship Company. Seaboard Steve. Company. Shepard Lirie. (See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.) Silver Line. (See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.) -Silver Java Pacific Line. (See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.) Southwestern Stevedoring Company. Soto Shipping Company, P. F.: Isbrandtsen-Moller Company (Maersk Line). Olsen Line, Fred. Sudden & Christenson : Arrow Line. Hamburg American Line. Klaveness Line. Reardon Smith Line. Swayne & Hoyt,-Ltd.: Calmar Line. Gulf Pacific Line. - Gulf Pacific Mail Line. Tacoma & Oriental Steamship Company. (See Dollar Steamship Lines Inc. Ltd.) Transatlantic Steamship Company of Gothenberg . (See General SS Corp. Ltd.) United Fruit Company. United Ocean Transport Company. ( See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.) Westfal-Larsen Company. ( See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.) Weyerhaeuser Steamship Company. (See Interocean Steamship Corp., Ltd.) Wood Lumber Company, E. K. 1054 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD APPENDIX H - RESULTS OF BALLOT-PACIFIC COAST DISTRICT I. L.' A. Question : "Shall we affiliate with the C. I. O. V' , Local No. City Yes No Na l City Yes No 38-2 Port Blakely______________ 5 2 38-115 Port Orford_______________ Port 14 0 38-4 Bandon ___________________ 13 3 38-116 Ketchikan 15 4 38-9 San Diego________________ 69 4 38-117 Seattle____________________ 257 43 38-12 Seattle____________________ 836 296 38-118 Sacramento_______________ 142 8 38-36 Seattle____________________ 37 90 38-119 Wilmington -------------- 50 16 38-44 San Francisco------------- 2,445 411 38-120 San Diego________________ 34 3 38-67 Vancouver________________ ________ ______ 38-122 Tacoma___________________ 2 0 38-76 Everett___________________ 91 39 38-123 Portland__________________ 331 59 38-77 Aberdeen_________________ ________ ____ 38-125 Ventura__________________ 15 0 38-78 Portland__________________ 734 169 38-126 Vancouver________________ 58 33 38-78A Portland__________________ 7 87 38-130 Victoria___________________ ________ ------ 38-79 San Francisco_____________ 2,220 703 38-131 Bellmgbam_______________ 80 5 38-80 Longview_________________ 145 12 38-132 San Francisco ------------- 22 8 38-85A Astoria___________________ 15 14 38-135 Portland --__-______________ nd 81 7 38-82 San Pedro________________ San 1,500 444 38-137 ______________ Hilo, Hawaii 236 0 38-83 Anacortes 4 22 38-140 Monterey_________________ Monterey 10 0 38-84 St Helens_______________ elms- -------- ------ 38-142 Skagway ----------------- 14 0 38-86 Angeles -------------- Port 40 43 38-143 Tacoma ------------------- 15 0 38-88 Poulsbo___________________ 43 . 2 38-104 Juneau___________________ 23 2 38-89 Olympia------------------ -------- ------ 38-144 Ketchukan---------------- 55 0 38-90 San Francisco_____________ 91 227 38-145 Eureka ------------------- 12 5 38-91 San Pedro________________ 63 9 38-146 Stockton ------------------ 7 3 38-92 Raymond_________________ 100 1 38-147 New Westminster-------- 21 1 38-93 Stockton__________________ 104 2 138-78 Portland__________________ 3 1 38-94 North Bend______________ 58 12 38-81 Rainier ------------------- 7 11 38-95 Winchester Bay _________ 11 0 38-85 Astoria___________________ 69 83 38-96 Port Townsend----------- 26 0 38-94A North Bend______________ ________ ______ 38-97 Tacoma___________________ 126 320 38-109 Stockton ___-______________ 164 11 38-98 Bellingham_______________ 124 15 38-112 Cordova ____-__ 38-100 San Francisco ------------- 100 0 38-121 Harbor___________________ ________ ------ 38-101 San Francisco_____________ 176 22 38-124 San Francisco_____________ ________ ----- 38-102 Stockton__________________ 97 7 38-127 New Westminster-------- 28 0 38-103 Eureka___________________ 46 11 38-129 Seward ------------------- -------- ------ 38-105 Santa Barbara_______ _____ 18 2 38-134 Los Angeles_______________ 282 23 38-106 Los Angeles_______________ 44 6 38-136 Honolulu_________________ 257 2 33-107 San Pedro________________ 35 258 38-138 Seattle -------------------- ________ ------ 38-103 Stockton__________________ 16 7 38-141 Valdez____________________ ________ ______ 38-110 Newport__________________ 2 24 38-148 S1tka_____________________ 8 3 38-111 Crescent City_____________ 9 1 38-149 Portland__________________ ________ ------ 38-113 Seattle-------------------- -------- ------ 38-150 Seattl--------------------- -------- ------ 38-114 Tacoma___________________ 9 29 1 Gardibaldi Local men in 38-78.