New England Fish Co.

NEW ENGLAND 'I$11 GOM,PANY 119 for the other employees 4 As the multiemployer bargaining history.. for the. various groups of other employees of the Employers varies considerably both as to the number and identity of employers covered with no fixed pattern, and the multiemployer unit sought here for the office clerical employees is not even coextensive with any of these established multiemployer units, we find that the multiemployer unit sought is. inappropriate, and that the single=employer units sought by Local 150 are appropriate in accord with the Board's well-established doctrine that such units are presumptively appropriate.' We shall; therefore, direct elections in the single-employer units heretofore found appropriate, and we affirm our original order dismissing the petition in Case No. 20-RC-3155 for a multiemployer unit.. . [Text of Second Direction of Elections omitted from publication.] MEMBER BEAN took no part in the consideration of the above Sup- plemental Decision and Second Direction of Elections. * Cf. Jos. E. Seagram & Sons, 101 NLRB 101. 5 See Rainbo Bread Co., 92 NLRB 181. In view of the recency of the multiemployer bargaining for office clerical employees in the industry in other areas of California , such a history is clearly not controlling with respect to the multiemployer unit sought here. See Sprague Electric Company, 98 NLRB 533. New England Fish Company and Alaska Fishermen's Union, Local Industrial , Union No. 1821, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case No.19-RC 1975. June 10, 1957 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before John H. Immel, Jr., hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free. from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Murdock and Rodgers]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved herein are labor organiza- tions within the meaning of the Act and claim to represent certain employees of the Employer.' 3. The Employer, a Maine corporation, operates several salmon can- neries in Alaska, and also employs employees upon various types of 1 Cordova District Fisheries Union, herein called the Intervenor, was permitted to ia- tervene in this proceeding on the basis of its contractual interest. 118 NLRB No. 16. 120 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, vessels. The only facility involved herein is the Employer's Orca cannery located in Cordova, Alaska, including employees assigned to vessels which are based at Cordova as well as certain classifications of employees working in the Orca cannery. The Intervenor contends that its contract with the Employer for the 1956 season constitutes a bar to an election at this time, although it admits that, by letter dated October 18, 1956, it informed the Employer that'it desired to amend the contract for the 1957 season . The termina- tion clause of the 1956 contract provides for automatic renewal of the agreement absent written notice by either party given on or before December 1, 1956, of a "desire to modify, change or terminate" the agreement. The Intervenor claims that the 1956 contract is a valid bar because the notice was to amend rather than to terminate and did not, therefore, prevent automatic renewal of the agreement. We reject this contention as being without merit as we find that the Inter- venor's notice to amend the contract is equivalent to a notice -to modify it as provided by the contract. Accordingly, as no new contract was executed by the parties prior to the filing of the instant petition on February 18,1957, we find that there is no contract bar to the present proceeding. We find, therefore, that a question affecting commerce exists con- cerning the representation of certain employees of the Employer with- in the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Petitioner seeks a unit limited to certain of the Employer's employees at its Orca .cannery located in Cordova, Alaska, including employees who work on various types of vessels which are based at Cordova. The Employer takes no position. The Intervenor does not affirmatively contend that this unit is inappropriate, but requests a determination by the Board as to whether the unit is inappropriate because it does not include employees of certain other employers in the same industry in the Copper River and Prince William Sound districts who are members of Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc., herein called A. S. I. The Employer has bargained with the Intervenor concerning the employees here sought for approximately 20 years and, until about 1950, contract negotiations for these employees were conducted for the Employer by A. S. I. In 1950 or 1951, the Employer resigned from A. S. I. insofar as pertains to the Copper River and Prince William Sound districts, but retained its membership in A. S. I. for purposes of its operations in other districts? Since that time, with respect to the employees here sought, the Employer and the Intervenor 2 Employees working in the Orca cannery and employees working out of Cordova are the only employees of the Employer located in the Copper River and Prince William Sound districts. NEW ENGLAND FISH COMPANY 121 annually stipulated to be bound by the terms negotiated between the Intervenor and A. S. I. for the Copper River and Prince William Sound districts, and have made these contracts effective by an exchange of letters following the execution of new agreements between the In- tervenor and A. S. I. In conformity with this practice, a written stip- ulation was entered into by these parties in 1956 which resulted in the Employer's adoption of the Intervenor's contract with A. S. I. for the 1956 season, and, despite the Intervenor's letter of October 18, 1956, the parties have not met for new contract negotiations, pending the negotiation of a contract for the 1957 season between the Intervenor and A. S. I. In the recent case of Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc., Case No. 19-RC-1965 (not reported in printed volumes of Board Decisions and Orders),' the instant Petitioner sought a unit including (a) the em- ployees of the 4 employers in the Copper River and Prince William Sound districts who are currently members of A. S. I., and (b) em- ployees of 4 other employers, including the instant Employer, who had formerly bargained through A. S. I. for their employees in the above-named districts, but who had since resigned from A. S. I. for these districts. When the instant Intervenor objected in that case to the inclusion of employees of the latter 4 employers, including the instant Employer, on the ground that they were no longer members of A. S. I., the Petitioner amended its petition to seek only employees of the 4 current employer-members of A. S. I. and, at the same time, filed the petition in the case at bar for the employees of the Employer alone. Following the hearing in Case No. 19-RC-1965, the Board, on April 10, 1957, issued a Decision and Direction of Election, finding that a unit limited to the employees of the four current members of A. S. I. in the Copper River and Prince William Sound districts was appropriate for bargaining purposes, and directing an election in such a unit. As stated above, the Employer, after resigning from A. S. I. for purposes of the Copper River and Prince William Sound districts, continued to apply to its Cordova employees the contracts negotiated by A. S. I. with the Intervenor for employees of A. S. I. members in those districts, and also continued to bargain as a member of A. S. I., with respect to its employees at facilities in other districts. What weight would be given to such evidence under other circumstances than those present in the case at bar we need not determine here. Since the Board found in Case No. 19-RC-1965, which finding was concurred in by the Intervenor, that a unit limited to employees of current A. S. I. members in the Copper River and Prince William Sound districts is appropriate, thereby impliedly finding that the 3 we take official notice of the Board 's Decision and Direction of Election in that case and hereby incorporate the record therein into the record of the instant case. 122 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Employer's Orca and Cordova employees were no longer properly part of such unit, and as no party affirmatively contends here that a broader unit than the one sought is appropriate, we find that the unit sought is appropriate for bargaining purposes, except in the respects noted below. The parties are in basic agreement as to the composition of the unit. The Intervenor, however, requests that the Board determine whether employees in the classifications of tender captain and pile- driver foreman, whom Petitioner would include, should be excluded from the unit as supervisors. The record shows that tender captains possess authority effectively to recommend the hire and discharge of employees and are responsible to the Employer for the overall op- eration of their boats. It also shows that piledriver foremen possess the authority to hire and discharge employees and to authorize over- time work. In view of these facts, we find that tender captains and piledriver foremen are supervisors within the meaning of the Act, and we shall exclude them from the unit. Accordingly, we find that the following employees of the Employer at Cordova, Alaska, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All tendermen (namely, engineers, assistant engineers, deckhands, cooks, combination tendermen and radio operators, combination mates and deckhands) and/or trapmen and/or gear scow men (namely, firemen, engineers, cooks, deckhands, and combination gear scow men and radio operators) and/or web and wire men (namely, web foremen, expert cotton web men, wire men, and cable splicers) and/or beachmen and/or piledriver men (namely, top loft men, head boom men, engineers, cooks, firemen, deckhands, and combination gear scow men and radio operators) and/or tallymen and/or members of the culinary department (namely, cooks, bakers, dishwashers, waiters, and bull cooks) ; men so employed shall also work on boats, lighters, and vessels, in canneries, salteries, and/or in any other capacity on the northbound and southbound trips, and at or about the cannery or salting station to which they may be assigned, but. excluding culinary workers engaged under the jurisdiction of the Cannery Workers Union, guards, tender captains, piledriver foremen, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act. 5. The Employer's operations appear to be seasonal in nature' Accordingly, the election directed herein shall be held during the Employer's peak season on a date to be determined by the Regional Director. . [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 4 Cf. Alaska Salmon Industry, Inc., supra.