Pennsylvania & Lake Erie Dock Co.

In the Matter of PENNSYLVANIA & LAKE ERIE DOCK Co. and UNITED DOCK WORKERS LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION No. 982 (C_I O) Case No. B-1584.-Decided November 6, 1939 Shipping Industry-Investigation of Representatives : controversy concerning representation of employees : employer's refusal to grant recognition of union as exclusive bargaining representative ; bargaining on basis of recognition of union for members only, no bar to investigation of representatives-Unit Appro- priate for Collective Bargaining : hourly paid employees of Company at its docks in Fairport Harbor, excluding foremen, subforemen , supervisors, clerical employees, and watchmen ; no controversy as to-Election Ordered Mr. Max W. Johnstone, for the Board. Mr. John C. Bane, Jr., of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Company. Mr. A. E. Stevenson, of Cleveland, Ohio, for the Union. Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE On August 10, 1939, United Dock Workers Local Industrial Union #982, herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for the Eighth Region (Cleveland, Ohio) a petition alleging that a ques- tion affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Pennsylvania & Lake Erie Dock Co., Conneaut, Ohio, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and cer- tification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On October 24, 1939, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. On October 24, 1939, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear- ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and upon the Union. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on October 27 and 30, 1939, at Cleveland, Ohio, before Peter Ward, the Trial Exam- 17 N. L. R. B., No. 21. 372 PENNSYLVANIA & LAKE ERIE DOCK COMPANY 373 iner duly designated. by the Board. The Board and the Company were represented by counsel, and the Union by its representative ; all participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. At the commencement of the hearing, counsel for the Company entered a special appearance and filed .a motion to dismiss the petition for lack of a question concerning representation. The Trial Examiner reserved ruling thereon. The motion is hereby denied for the reasons stated in Section III, infra. During the course of the hearing, the Trial Examiner made several rulings on other motions and on objections to the admission of evi- dence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY The Company, a subsidiary of the United States Steel Corporation, maintains docks at Fairport Harbor, Ohio, for the unloading of iron ore from ships. The Company handles approximately 1,000,000 tons of iron ore annually at Fairport Harbor, all of which is shipped to Fairport Harbor from ports in the States of Minnesota and Wisconsin. The Company admits the jurisdiction of the Board. II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED United Dock Workers Local Industrial Union #982 is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, admitting to membership the hourly paid dock employees of the Company at Fairport Harbor. . III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On July 22, 1939, the Union requested the Company to negotiate with it for the purposes of collective bargaining. At a conference held on August 21, 1939, the Union claimed to represent a majority of the hourly paid dock employees and presented a proposed contract to the Company providing for exclusive recognition of the Union. The several sections of the contract were discussed but the Company re- fused to recognize the Union as the bargaining representative for any employees except union members. The parties again met on Septem- ber 2 and 13, 1939, for the purposes of discussing the union proposal. The Company. reiterated its position at these meetings that it would not grant exclusive recognition to the Union. 374 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Company contends that there is no present question concerning representation because the parties, subsequent to the filing of the petition herein, engaged in bargaining conferences. This contention is without merit." We find that, a question has arisen concerning representation of employees of the Company. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among, the several States and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Company and the Union agreed at the hearing that the appropriate unit should consist of all the hourly paid employees of the-Company at its docks in Fairport Harbor, excluding foremen, subforemen, supervisors, clerical employees, and watchmen. We see no reason to deviate from the desires of the parties. We find that the hourly paid employees of the Company at its docks in Fairport Harbor, excluding foremen, subforemen, super- visors, clerical employees, and watchmen, constitute a unit appro- priate for the purpose of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES Although the Union claimed substantial membership among the hourly paid dock employees, it agreed that an election by secret ballot is necessary to resolve the question concerning representation. The parties agreed at the hearing that the.employees in the appro- priate unit who are on the pay roll immediately preceding the date of the election should be eligible to vote. We see no reason to depart from the desires of the parties. We find that those eligible to vote in the election shall be the employees in the appropriate unit who are employed by the Company during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the election, hereinafter to be directed, including 1 Cf. Matter of American Cyanamid and Chemical Corporation and Local 12119, Gas Coke and Chemical Worker., Union District No . 50, United Mine Workers of. America, 11 N. L. R. B. 803. PENNSYLVANIA & LAKE ERIE DOCK COMPANY 375 employees who do not world during such pay-roll period because they may be ill, on vacation , or temporarily laid off, but excluding employees who will have since quit or been discharged for cause. On the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre- sentation of employees of Pennsylvania & Lake Erie Dock Co., Con- neaut, Ohio, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The hourly paid employees of the Company at its docks in Fair- port Harbor, excluding foremen, subforemen , supervisors , clerical employees, and watchmen, constitute a unit appropriate for the pur- poses of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board to.; asc ertairL representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Pennsylvania & Lake Erie Dock Co., Conneaut , Ohio, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction , under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Eighth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela- tions Board and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations , among the hourly paid employees of the Company at its docks in Fairport Harbor, who are employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the election, including employees who do not work during such pay-roll period because they may be ill, on vacation, or temporarily laid off, but excluding fore- men, subforemen , supervisors, clerical employees, watchmen, and employees who will have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by United Dock Workers Local Industrial Union #982, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations , for the purposes of collective bargaining. 247354-40=vol. 17-25