American Freezerships, Inc.

AMERICAN FREEZERSHIPS, INC. 1113 the Respondent's other defenses , I shall recommend dismissal of the 8 (a) (5) allega- tions of the complaint. . IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE The activities of the Respondent set forth above, to the extent that they have been found to constitute unfair labor practices , occurring in connection with its operations described in section I, above , have a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States , and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE REMEDY Having found that the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices, it will be recommended that it cease and desist therefrom , and take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies of the Act. As found above , S-F, the Respondent herein , and Becker-Durham , together con- stitute a single employer within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the Act. The Respondent's unfair labor practices as found herein must be considered in conjunc- tion with the unfair labor practices engaged in by Becker-Durham as found by the Board in its decision in Becker-Durham , Inc., 130 NLRB 1356. The totality of the violations engaged in by the Employer herein involved disclose a danger that the Respondent may engage in other unfair labor practices , though not necessarily by the same means. The preventive purposes of the Act may be thwarted unless the recommended order is coextensive with the threat . To effectuate the policies of the Act it will theretore be recommended that the Respondent cease and desist from infringing in any manner upon the rights guaranteed employees by the Act. Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact , and upon the entire record in the case, I make the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers, AFL-CIO, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 2. By interfering with, restraining , and coercing its employees in the exercise of rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act. 3. The aforesaid unfair labor pactices are unfair labor practices affecting com- merce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Respondent has not committed unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8(a)(3) and (5) of the Act, as alleged in the complaint. [Recommendations omitted from publication.]' American Freezerships, Inc.' and Local 3, Fishermen and Allied Workers of the International Longshoremen's and Warehouse- men's Union. Case No. 19-RC-2811. Febn iary 15, 1962 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, hearings were held before Howard E. Hilbun, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearings are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member panel [Chairman McCulloch and Members Rodgers and Fanning]. I Employer's name appears as amended at the hearing. 135 NLRB No. 110. 1114 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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 claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the representation of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of all employees em- ployed by the Employer on its vessel, the Theresa Lee. Intervenor Marine Engineers Beneficial Association No. 38, Inc., AFL-CIO, contends that a separate unit of licensed and unlicensed engineers is appropriate. Intervenor Seafarer's International Union of North America asserts that a unit of all employees excluding engineers is appropriate. The Employer agrees with the Petitioner's unit position. The Employer is engaged in processing salmon and crabs for sale to canneries. The entire operation takes place aboard its fishing vessel, the Theresa Lee, and involves the purchase of fish from local fishermen in Alaskan waters, the processing and freezing of the fish on the ship, and the sale of the fish in the State of Washington. The Employer's operations are divided into a 3-month salmon sea- son which runs from June until September, and a 9-month crab season. Its crew in both seasons includes a captain, a mate, two or three engineers, two cooks, and several deckhands. In addition, it employs approximately 4 salmon processors during the salmon season and 10 crab processors for the crab season. For the most part, the work involved in loading, processing, freezing, and unloading the fish is done by the deckhands and processors. The engineers spend most of their time in the engineroom and also do maintenance on the refrigeration units aboard the ship. The Employer had three engineers on the ship during the 3-month period June to September 1961 that it was in Alaska processing salmon, but has indicated that it intends to have only two licensed engineers, a chief engineer and his assistant, on board when the ship leaves to process crabs. However, due to certain Coast Guard licensing regu- lations and the fact that one of the engineers whom the Employer has indicated it will retain is not as yet licensed, the possibility re- mains that there may be three engineers aboard the ship, both licensed and unlicensed, when it leaves for Alaska. In any event, the Peti- tioner, the Employer, and the Engineers Union are agreed that the chief engineer, who alternates watches in the engineroom with his assistant, is not a supervisor. There is no history of collective bargaining for any of the em- ployees sought herein. The Board has held that a unit of all em- AMERICAN FREEZERSHIPS, INC. 1115 ployees aboard a fishing boat, including engineers, is appropriate .2 However, a separate unit of ship engineers is also appropriate where, as here, a union seeks to represent them separately.' Accordingly, we shall make no final unit determination at this time, but shall first ascertain the desires of the employees as expressed in the elections directed below. The Petitioner contends that the mate is a leadman, not a super- visor, and should be included in the unit. The Seafarer's Union con- tends that the mate is a supervisor and should be excluded. The Employer is neutral. The mate regularly substitutes for the captain about 50 percent of his time. The captain stands watch 6 hours and is off duty 6 hours. During the latter period, the mate is in complete charge of the ship. Although the evidence does not indicate whether the mate has authority to hire, discharge, or discipline employees, he may effectively recommend such action to the captain. In view of the mate's responsibility for the direction of the crew and the frequent substitutions for the captain at regular intervals, we find that the mate is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. Accordingly, we shall exclude him from the unit.' 5. The Seafarer's Union contends that no election should be directed until the Employer has hired the crab processors it must have for its crab processing operations. The Employer's salmon season ran from June to September 1961, and since then the ship has been undergoing repairs in Seattle, Washington. The Employer's president testified at the hearing on remand that the Theresa Lee would be leaving for Alaska and the start of its crab season before January 1, 1962. At that time its crew would consist of a captain, a mate, two engineers, two cooks, and three deckhands. In addition, 8 to 12 crab processors would be employed, but the Employer did not know at the time of the hearing whether it would hire these individuals before the Theresa Lee left Seattle or after it reached Alaska. In any event, the election directed herein will not be held prior to the Theresa Lee's arrival in Alaska, and the commencement of its crab processing operations with a crew which will, by that time, include crab processors hired either in Seattle or in Alaska. Therefore, a postponement is unnecessary, and we shall direct an immediate election. Accordingly, we shall direct separate elections in the following vot- ing groups of employees employed by the Employer on its vessel the Theresa Lee, excluding from each voting group guards and super- visors as defined in the Act. Group 1. All licensed and unlicensed engineers, including the chief engineer. 2 General Foods Corporation, Birds Eye Division, 110 NLRB 1088, 1091. 8 Graham Transportation Company, 124 NLRB 960. ' General Foods Corporation, supra. 1116 DECISIONS ' OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Group 2. All other employees, excluding the captain and the mate. We shall place the names of the Engineers Association and the Fish- ermen and Allied Workers on the ballot in the election among the employees in Group 1, and the names of the Fishermen and Allied Workers and the Seafarer's Union on the ballot in Group 2. If the majority of employees voting in Group 1 select the Engineers Association, they will be taken to have indicated their desire to con- stitute a separate unit, and the Regional Director conducting the elec- tions directed herein is hereby instructed to issue a certification of rep- resentatives to the Engineers Association for such unit, which the Board, in such circumstances, finds appropriate for the purposes of col- lective bargaining. However, if a majority of the employees in Group 1 do not vote for the Engineers Association, these employees will appropriately be included with the employees in Group 2, and their votes will be pooled with those in Group 2.5 The Regional Director is instructed to issue a certification of representatives to the Fishermen and Allied Workers or to the Seafarer's Union if either is selected by the majority of the employees in Group 2 or in the pooled group, as the case may be, which the Board, in such circumstances, finds to be a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining. [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.] 6 If the votes are pooled , they are to be tallied in the following manner: The votes for the labor organization seeking a separate unit in Group 1 shall be counted as valid votes, but neither for nor against the labor organization which is seeking the more com- prehensive unit. All other votes are to be accorded their face value, whether for repre- sentation by the union seeking the more comprehensive group or for no union. American Lace Mills, Inc. and Local 222, International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, AFL-CIO. Case No. 2,0-CA-848. February 19, 1962 DECISION AND ORDER On October 9, 1961, Trial Examiner George J. Bott issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices, and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the Intermediate Report attached hereto. The Trial Examiner also found that the Respondent had not engaged in other unfair labor practices alleged in the com- plaint and recommended that such allegations be dismissed. There- after, the General Counsel and the Union filed exceptions to the In- termediate Report and supporting briefs.' i Respondent filed a memorandum in support of the recommendations of the Trial Examiner that certain allegations of the complaint be dismissed , and further requested 135 NLRB No. 109.