Dravo Corp.Download PDFNational Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsMar 16, 194239 N.L.R.B. 846 (N.L.R.B. 1942) Copy Citation In the Matter of- DRAVO CORPORATION, KEYSTONE SAND DIVISION and NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, HARBOR 25, AFFILIATED WITH A. F. L. In the Matter of DRAVO CORPORATION, KEYSTONE SAND DIVISION and NATIONAL MARINE ENGINEERS BENEFICIAL ASSOCIATION, AFFILIATED WITH C. I. 0: In the Matter of DRAVO CORPORATION, KEYSTONE SAND DIVISION and NATIONAL MARITIME UNION, AFFILIATED WITH C. I. O. In the Matter of DRAVO CORPORATION, KEYSTONE SAND DIVISION and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL UNION No. 66' Cases Nos. R-3505 to R-3508, inclusive, respectively. Decided March 16,1942 Jurisdiction : sand, gravel, builders' supplies and ready mixed concrete pro- duction industry Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question: con- flicting claims of rival unions ; dispute as to appropriate unit ; Company refused to accord petitioning unions recognition until certified by the Board; elections necessary. Units Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : separate units comprising : (1) all employees of dredges, excluding supervisory personnel; (2) all masters, mates, and pilots on tow boats; (3) all engineers and assistant engineers on tow boats; and (4) all employees of tow boats, including watchmen, strikers, deckhands, cooks, and maids, but excluding masters, mates, pilots, engineers, and assistant engineers. Mr. John S. Mason, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Company. Mr. A. Di. Wilner, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Operating Engineers. Mr. Edward J. Malamzent, of New York City, and Mr. James L. Scott, for the N. M. U. Mr. William L. Standard, by Mr. Edward J. Malament, of New York City, for the M. E. B. A. Mr. W. H. Griffith, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the M. M. P. Miss Marcia Hertzmark, of counsel to the Board. 39 N. L. R. B., No. 165. • 846 DRAVO- CORPORATION .DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS STATEMENT OF THE CASE 847 On October 16, 1941, National Organization of Masters; Mates & Pilots, Harbor 25, affiliated with A. F. L., herein called the M. M. P.; National Marine Engineers Beneficial Association, affiliated with C. I. 0., herein called the M. E. B. A.; and National Maritime Union, affiliated with C. I. 0., herein called the N. M. U., filed with the Regional Director for the Sixth Region (Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania) petitions alleging that questions affecting commerce had arisen con- cerning the representation of employees of Dravo Corporation, Key- stone Sand Division, Neville Island, Pennsylvania, herein called the Company, and requesting investigations and certifications of repre- sentatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On January 7, 1942, the Na-, tional 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, as amended, ordered investigations and authorized the Regional Director to con- duct them and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice; and, pursuant to Article III, Section 10 (c) (2) of said Rules and Regulations, ordered that these cases be consolidated. On January 13, 1942, the Regional Director issued a notice of hear- ing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company, the M. M. P., the N. M. U., and the M. E. B. A., and upon International Union of Operating Engineers, herein called the Operating Engineers, a labor organization claiming to represent employees directly affected by the investigation. On January 15, 1942, the Operating Engineers filed with the Regional Director a petition requesting an investigation and certification of representatives. On January 21, 1942, the Board ordered an investigation of this case, authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice, and ordered that this case be consolidated with the other cases referred to above. On January 22, 1942, the Board issued a notice of postponement of the hearing, copies of which were duly served upon all parties. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on February 4, 1942, at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, before Henry Shore, the -Trial Examiner duly designated by the Chief Trial Examiner. The Company, the, M. M. P., the M. E. B. A., the N. M. U., and the Operating Engineers were represented and participated in the hearing. Full opportunity 448105-42-vol 39-55 848 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. At the con- clusion of the hearing the M. M. P., the N. M. U., and the M. E. B. A. moved to dismiss the petition of the Operating Engineers on the ground that the unit sought by that organization is inappropriate and on the further ground that it does not represent any employees in the units claimed to be appropriate by the M. M. P., the N. M. U., and the M. E. B. A. The Trial Examiner referred the motion to the Board. It is hereby denied. During the course of the' hearing the Trial Examiner made rulings on other 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. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Dravo Corporation, a Pennsylvania corporation, consists of four divisions. The Keystone Sand Division, with which we are here con- cerned, is engaged principally in the production, sale, and distribution of sand, gravel, builders' supplies and ready mixed concrete. During the year 1941 its total revenue was in excess of $1,750,000, of which about 80 percent was derived from the sale of the above-named prod- ucts. Approximately 5 percent of the amount received from the sale of these products represented the value of products shipped to points outside Pennsylvania. Approximately 20 percent of the total gross revenue of the Keystone Sand Division for the year 1941 was derived from transportation by river of miscellaneous products, and about 75 percent of this figure represented the value of products shipped outside Pennsylvania. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED National Organization of Masters, Mates & Pilots, Harbor 25, and International Union of Operating Engineers, Local Union No. 06, are labor organizations affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. They admit to membership employees of the Company. National Marine Engineers Beneficial Association, and National Maritime Union are labor organizations affiliated with the Congress of.Industrial Organizations. They admit to membership employees of the Company. DRAVO CORPORATION III. THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION 849 The parties stipulated that a question has arisen concerning 'the representation of employees of the Company in that there is a dispute between the unions involved herein concerning the appropriate unit. The Company has refused to bargain with any of the unions until it has been certified by the Board. A statement by the Regional Director, introduced in evidence, indicates that the M. M. P., the M. E. B. A., and the N. M. U. each represents a substantial number of employees of the Company in the unit which each contends is appropriate, and that the Operating Engineers represents a substantial number of employees on the Com- pany's dredges. We find that questions have arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the questions concerning representation which have arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company 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 APPROPRIATE UNIT The Company operates five tow boats which are self-propelled, and two stationary dredges on the Ohio River. The M. M. P. desires a unit composed of masters (or captains), mates, and pilots on the Company's tow boats. The M. E. B. A. wishes a unit composed of all engineers 'on the tow boats. The N. M. 11. wishes a unit of all employees of the tow boats, including watchmen,' i The M. M P submitted to the Regional Director 9 authorization cards, all bearing genuine original signatures and 8 bearing names of persons on the Company's pay roll of September 30, 1941, which contained the names of 13 persons in the unit alleged by the M. M. P to be appropriate. The M. If. B. A. submitted 8 applications for membership , all bearing genuine original signatures and 6 bearing names of persons on the pay roll mentioned above, which con- tained the names of 9 persons in the unit alleged by At If. B ' A. to be appropriate. The N. M. U. submitted 20 application cards, all bearing genuine original signatures Nineteen of the cards bore names of persons on the pay roll of September 30, 1941, which contained the names of 31 , persons in the proposed appropriate unit. The Operating Engineers submitted 19 application ` cards, all bearing genuine original signatures of-persons whose names appear on the September 30 pay roll. None of the cards bore names of persons in any of the units sought by the other 3 unions. There are approximately 75 persons in the unit alleged by the Operating 'Engineers 'to'be appropriate. The parties stipulated at the hearing that Lyle Cournette and Rex Casey listed on the pay roll as "watchman and mate," as well as Jack Rocker , listed as "watchman," fall within the unit claimed by the N. M U. 850 • DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD strikers,3 deckhands, cooks, and maids, but excluding masters, mates, pilots, engineers, and assistant engineers. There is no overlapping in the claims of these organizations. The Operating Engineers desires a unit composed of all employees, exclusive of supervisory personnel, on all floating equipment of the Company, including dredges, tow' boats, and other floating craft' The Company takes no position with respect to the unit or units. The Operating Engineers has had a contract with the Company for about 6 years, covering its unloading-dock personnel, but none of the other unions involved herein has had contractual relations with the Company,5 and none of the employees presently sought to be repre- sented is included in any contract with the Company. Employees on the dredges are subject to workmen's compensation, wake and hour, and unemployment insurance laws, and they do not live on the dredges. Employees of the tow boats are not subject to the regulatory laws; they live on boats; and they work different hours than employees on the dredges. There is very little interchange of employees between the two types of craft, and their duties are dis- similar. For example, the captain or master on a tow boat must have a knowledge of the river, and know the lights and other regulations pertaining to navigation, whereas the captain on a dredge need not have such knowledge; his work consists of supervising the work of the _men on the dredge. The engineer on a tow boat answers the signals pertaining to the operation of the boat; on a dredge the engineer's duties pertain to the machinery, which must be kept in operation. Dockhands on both types of craft work on barges, but dockhands on tow boats have additional duties relating to movement of the boats. There are cooks and chambermaids on the tow boats, but not on the dredges ; and there are firemen on the dredges, but not on the tow boats. There are no mates or pilots, as such, on the dredges. Because of the difference in duties described above, we find that the employees of the tow boats should not be combined with those on the dredges in a unit for collective bargaining, as contended by the Operating Engineers. We find, however, that all employees of 3 The strikers are also known as oilers or second engineers and are designated on the pay roll of the Company as "striker-engineers " 4 It appears from the record that only employees of tow boats and dredges are involved, since there is not a separate group of persons employed on barges The Operating Engi- neers' unit would embrace all employees sought by the other unions, except masters and captains , and in addition , engineers , diggers, oilers , firemen , deckhands , watchmen, and loaders on the dredges 6In November 1940 and in September 1941, the N. M . U. lost consent elections, in the first of which the unit consisted of "all unlicensed personnel on tow boats and dredges, including . . . mates and watchmen , both licensed and unlicensed , and landing men . . and in the second of which the unit consisted of "all employees on the tow boats and dredges of the Company , exclusive of masters and pilots on the tow boats " The Operat- ing Engineers did not intervene in either of these elections PRAVO CORPORATION 851 the Company's dredges, excluding supervisory personnel,' constitute a' unit appropriate for the purposes 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 bargain- ing and otherwise will effectuate the policies of the Act.7 Masters, mates, and pilots The master of a tow boat takes complete charge thereof and is responsible for its being fully equipped and manned. He also as- sumes the pilot's duties when the latter is absent. The pilot navi- gates the boat, and takes the captain's' place when the captain is off duty.' The mate is the "superintendent" on deck and exercises super- visory authority over the deckhands. Mates and pilots frequently have captain's licenses ; they exercise a degree of supervisory author- ity. Although the Company's operations do not require that any of its personnel be licensed, the M. M. P. accepts for membership only licensed deck officers. Most of the Company's masters, mates, and pilots are licensed. We find that all masters, mates, and pilots on the tow boats of the Company constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that said unit will insure to employees of the Com- pany the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise will effectuate the policies of the Act." Engineers and assistant engineers Engineers on tow boats answer the signals pertaining to the opera- tion of the boats. The M. E. B. A. requires that its members be licensed by the Bureau of Marine Inspection, and organizes engineers on self-propelled craft only. Although the Company does not re- quire that the engineers be licensed, it appears from the record that many, if not all, are licensed. We find that all engineers and assistant engineers on the tow boats of the Company constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes 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 will effectuate the policies of the Act. 9 The Opeiatmng Engineers desires to exclude only masters or captains as supervisory personnel 7 Cf Matter of Tide Water Associated Oil Company and National Maritime Union of America, 38 N. L. R.-B. 582; and Matter of Merchants & Miners Transportation Co and National Organization Masters, Mates & Pilots of America , Local #9, 37 N. L It. B 1165 8 Cf. Matter of Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation and National Organization Masters, Mates & Pilots of America , Local No. 25, affiliated with American Federation of Labor, 37 N. L. R. B. 366 852 - DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The remaining employees on the tow boats In addition to the employees discussed above, there are employed on the tow boats watchmen,° strikers, deckhands, cooks, and maids, whom the N. M. U. desires to represent. Prior to February 1941, the N. M. U. admitted-to membership both licensed and unlicensed personnel on tow boats and dredges. Since that time it has followed, wherever possible, the policy of accepting only unlicensed persons working on self-propelled craft. We find that all employees of the Company's tow boats, including watchmen, strikers, deckhands,,cooks, and maids, but excluding mas- ters, mates, pilots, engineers, and assistant engineers, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes 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 will effectuate the policies of the Act. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES We find that the questions concerning representation which have arisen can best be resolved by the holding of, elections by secret ballot. The Operating Engineers desires that a current pay roll be used to determine those eligible to vote. The M. M. P., the M. E. B. A., and the N. M. U. ask that the pay roll for the period immediately preceding the filing- of their petitions be used because of charges of unfair labor practices which were filed against the Company subsequent to the filing of the petitions. All such charges have, however, been either withdrawn or waived.10 The record indi- cates that, although a few changes -in" personnel were made between the, date of the petitions and the hearing, they have not been out of the ordinary. We shall follow our usual practice and direct that per- sons eligible to participate in the elections shall be the employees in the appropriate units who were employed by the Company during the pay-roll period next preceding the date of the Direction of Elec- tions herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Direction. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: ° See footnote 2, supra 10A charge filed by the N M. U on October 20, 1941 (Case No VI-C-643) was with- drawn on December 29, 1941; a charge filed by the M. E B. A. on November 5, 1941 (Case No . VI-C-651), and one filed by the N. M U on January 29, 1942 ( Case No VI-C-678), were waived on January 30 and 29, respectively . On February 12, 1942, the N. M-. U. withdrew the charges in Case No . VI-C-678. DRAVO CORPORATION CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 853 1. Questions affecting, commerce have arisen concerning the rep- resentation of employees of Dravo Corporation, Keystone Sand Divi- sion, Neville Island, Pennsylvania, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. All employees of the Company's dredges, excluding supervisory personnel, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act. 3. All masters, mates, and pilots on the tow boats of the Company constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain- ing, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act. 4. All engineers and assistant engineers on the tow boats of the Company constitute a unit appropriate' for the purposes of, collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act. 5. All employees of the Company's tow boats, including watchmen, strikers, deckhands, cooks, and maids, but excluding masters, mates, pilots, engineers, and assistant engineers, constitute a unit appro- priate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS 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 Re- lations Board Rules and Regulations-Series, 2, as amended, it is hereby DumcTm that, as part of the investigation ordered by the Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Dravo Corporation, Keystone Sand Division, Neville Island, Pennsylvania, elections 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 Di- rector for the Sixth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among employees in the following categories who were employed during the pay-roll period next pre- ceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during such pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or in the,active military service or training of the United States or 854 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD temporarily laid off, but excluding employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause: 1. All employees of the Company's dredges, excluding supervisory personnel, to determine whether 'or not they desire to be represented by International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 66, for the purposes of collective bargaining; 2. All masters, mates, and pilots on the Company's tow boats to determine whether they desire to be represented by National Organ- ization of Masters, Mates & Pilots, Harbor 25, affiliated with A. F. L., or by International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 66, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither; 3. All engineers and assistant engineers on the Company's tow boats to determine whether they desire to be represented by National Marine Engineers Beneficial Association, affiliated with C. I. 0., or by International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 66, for the purposes.of collective bargaining, or by neither ; and 4. All employees of the Company's tow boats, including watchmen, strikers, deckhands, cooks, and maids, but excluding masters, mates, pilots, engineers, and assistant engineers, to determine whether they desire to be represented by National Maritime Union, affiliated with C. I. 0., or by International Union of Operating Engineers, Local No. 66, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by' neither. MR. WM. M. LEISERSON took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Elections. Copy with citationCopy as parenthetical citation