Int'l Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, etc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 12, 1959

125 N.L.R.B. 113 (N.L.R.B. 1959)

INTiL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS , MATES & PILOTS , ETC. 113
in the election 4 We shall therefore set the election aside and order
a new election 5
[The Board set aside the election ]
[Text of Direction of Second Election omitted from publication ]
views with individual employees conducted at the 20th and Main Streets cafeteria also
came within the doctrine 's proscription See Columbus Dvvauon, Colonnal Stores Incorpo-
rated, supra , Hook Drugs, The, 117 NLRB 846, The Gallaher Drug Company, 115
NLRB 1379
4 We find no merit in the Employer's contention that such a finding is contrary to the
rights of free speech guaranteed employers in the Act We have held that the Act does
not prevent the Board from holding in a representation case that expression of views,
whether or not protected by Section 8{e), can be a basis for upsetting an election See
Metropohtan Life Insurance Company, 90 NLRB 935, 938
5 As the facts alleged by the Employer in its exceptions, even if accepted as true, in no
way affect our disposition of this objeetion, we find no merit in the Employer 's contention
that it has been denied an opportunity to be heard The Employer's request for a hear-
ing is therefore denied Finally , in view of our decision to set aside the election on the
basis discussed above we need not consider the other recommendations of the Regional
Director or the Employer's exceptions thereto
International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots of
America, Inc ., AFL-CIO; Great Lakes District , Local No. 47,
International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots of
America, Inc., AFL-CIO and Chicago Calumet Stevedoring
Co., Inc., Charging Party
International Organization of Masters , Mates and Pilots of
America, Inc., AFL-CIO, Great Lakes District, Local No. 47,
International Organization of Masters , Mates and Pilots of
America, Inc., AFL-CIO and P & V Maritime Corporation,
Charging Party
International Organization of Masters , Mates and Pilots of
America, Inc., AFL-CIO ; Great Lakes District , Local No. 47,
International Organization of Masters , Mates and Pilots of
America, Inc., AFL-CIO and North Pier Terminal Company,
Charging Party
International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots of
America, Inc., AFL-CIO, and International Vice-President
Captain Rolla R. Johnson and Cleveland Stevedore Company;
Lederer Terminal Warehouse Company; National Terminals
Corporation; and Shipping Federation of Canada, Charging
Parties. Cases Nos 13-CC-168, 13-CC-169, 13-CC-170, and
13-CC-180 (formerly 8-CC-76) November 12, 1959
DECISION AND ORDER
On April 20, 1959, Trial Examiner Louis Libbm issued his Inter-
mediate Report in the above-entitled proceedings, finding that the
125 NLRB No 19
114 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Respondents had engaged in and were engaging in certain unfair
labor practices and recommending that they cease and desist there-
from and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the copy of
the Intermediate Report attached hereto. He also found that the
Respondents had not engaged in and were not engaging in other un-
fair labor practices alleged in the complaint and recommended their
dismissal. Thereafter, all parties filed exceptions to the Intermediate
Report and supporting briefs.
The Board has reviewed the rulings made at the hearing and finds
that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are affirmed.
The Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the exceptions
and briefs, and the entire record in these cases, and hereby adopts the
findings, conclusions,' and recommendations of the Trial Examiner.
ORDER
Upon the entire record in these cases, and pursuant to Section
10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National
Labor Relations Board hereby orders that Respondents Rolla R.
Johnson and International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots
of America, Inc., AFL-CIO, its officers, agents, successors, and
assigns, including its agent, Great Lakes District, Local No. 47, Inter-
national Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots of America, Inc.,
AFIr-CIO, shall:
1. Cease and desist from inducing or encouraging employees of
employers (other than foreign shipowners) doing business with
Lederer Terminal Warehouse Company and Cleveland Stevedore
Company to engage in a strike or concerted refusal in the course of
their employment to use, manufacture, process, transport, or other-
wise handle or work on goods, articles, materials, or commodities, or
to perform any services for their respective employers, where an
object thereof is (1) to force or require such employers to cease doing
business with Lederer Terminal Warehouse Company and Cleveland
Stevedore Company, or (2) to force or require Lederer Terminal
Warehouse Company and Cleveland Stevedore Company to cease
doing business with foreign shipowners.
2, Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
I The Trial Examiner concluded that Respondents ' appeals to secondary employees at
their union meetings to respect the primary picket line in the Chicago -Milwaukee area
did not constitute the unlawful inducement of employees within the meaning of Sec-
tion 8(b) (4) (A) of the Act. In doing so, he relied in part on Interborough News Com-
pany, 90 NLRB 2135 . In our opinion , the Interborough decision is inapposite to the facts
in the instant cases. While we concur in his ultimate conclusion regarding this conduct
by Respondents , we do so in reliance upon Moore Dry Dock Company , 92 NLRB 547.
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC . 115
(a) Post at their offices in Cleveland, Ohio, copies of the notice
attached to the Intermediate Report marked "Appendix A." z Copies
of said notice, to be furnished by the Regional Director for the
Thirteenth Region, shall, after being duly signed by official repre-
sentatives of Respondents, including the hereinabove named agent,
be posted immediately upon receipt thereof, and maintained for a
period of 60 consecutive days thereafter in conspicuous places, in-
cluding all places where notices to members are customarily posted.
Reasonable steps shall be taken by Respondents to insure that said
notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(b) Mail to the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region signed
copies of said notice for posting by Lederer Terminal Warehouse
Company and Cleveland Stevedore Company, as well as the companies
listed in footnote 3 of this Order,' if said companies are willing, at
their places of business in Ohio, where notices to their employees are
customarily posted 4
(c) Notify the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region in
writing, within 10 days from the date of this Order, what steps Re-
spondents have taken to comply herewith.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint, insofar as it alleges vio-
lations of Section 8 (b) (4) (A) of the Act by Respondents at Chicago,
Illinois, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and by Great Lakes District,
Local No. 47, International Organization of Masters, Mates and
Pilots of America, Inc., AFL-CIO, at Cleveland, Ohio, be, and it
hereby is, dismissed.
MEMBER JENKINS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Order.
2 This notice shall be amended by substituting for the words "The Recommendations of
a Trial Examiner" the words "A Decision and Order." In the event that this Order is
enforced by a decree of it United States Court of Appeals, there shall be substituted for
the words "Pursuant to it Decision and Order" the words "Pursuant to a Decree of the
United States Court of Appeals, Enforcing an Order."
3 These include valley Freight Lines, Lake Erie Freight Lines, Cleveland Buffalo Freight
Lines, Saunders Cartage Freight Lines, Greeley Warehouse, Federal Express, Inc., Shoe-
mauker Company, Baltimore-Pittsburgh Freight Company. American Rubber Company,
S. J. Kiebler Brothers, Warner and Smith Truck Transport, Brewer Trucking Company,
and Norwalk Truck Lines, Inc.
4 There shall be inserted in the caption of said notices , following the name of the
unions, the words "and to All Employees of" followed by the name of the employer at
whose premises the said notice is to be posted.
INTERMEDIATE REPORT AND RECOMMENDED ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon separate charges filed by Chicago Calumet Stevedoring Co., Inc. (herein
sometimes called Chicago Calumet), P & V Atlas Maritime Corporation ( herein
sometimes called P & V Atlas), North Pier Terminal Company (herein sometimes
called North Pier), and upon a single charge filed by Cleveland Stevedore Company
(herein sometimes called Cleveland Stevedore), Lederer Terminal Warehouse Com-
pany ( herein sometimes called Lederer), National Terminals Corporation ( herein
sometimes called National), and Shipping Federation of Canada (herein sometimes
116 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
called Federation) the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board,
by the Regional Director for the Thirteenth Region (Chicago, Illinois), issued a
consolidated complaint, dated May 23, 1958, and an amended consolidated com-
plaint, dated July 2, 1958, alleging that the parties listed in the caption as Respond-
ents, herein sometimes called the International or MMP, the District, or Local 47,
and Johnson or Captain Johnson, had engaged in and were engaging in unfair labor
practices within the meaning of Section 8(b) (4) (A) and Section 2(6) and (7) of
the National Labor Relations Act, 61 Stat. 136, herein called the Act.
More specifically with respect to the unfair labor practices, the amended consoli-
dated complaint alleges, in substance, that: (1) Respondents MMP and Local 47
are engaging in a strike against owners of foreign vessels in connection with a dis-
pute concerning the use by said foreign vessels of American and/or Canadian pilots
or sailing masters when said foreign vessels are navigating in the Great Lakes;
(2) in furtherance of said dispute and strike, Respondents MMP and Local 47 have
picketed in the vicinity of docks, piers, and other waterfront terminals at Chicago,
Illinois; Milwaukee, Wisconsin; Cleveland, Ohio, and at other ports on the Great
Lakes; (3) in furtherance of said dispute and strike, and as a result of requests and
appeals by Respondents MMP and Local 47 to other labor organizations to order,
instruct, and direct their members employed by Chicago Calumet, P & V Atlas, and
North Pier to refuse to perform services for their employers, said labor organiza-
tions, acting in support of and in concert wtih Respondents MMP and Local 47, have
appealed to employees of the aforesaid employers not to load or unload or handle
cargo carried or to be carried by foreign vessels to or from Great Lakes ports with
the result that said employees have refused to perform said services for their em-
ployers with respect to foreign vessels owned by specified foreign owners; (4) in
furtherance of the aforesaid dispute and strike, Respondents MMP and Local 47,
through their agent, Respondent Johnson, have picketed in the vicinity of docks,
piers, and waterfront terminals of Cleveland Stevedore and Lederer in Cleveland,
Ohio, and in the course of said picketing have appealed to employees of carriers
and other customers doing business with Cleveland Stevedore and Lederer to re-
frain from crossing said respective picket lines with the result that employees of
specified carriers have refused to make deliveries to, or accept shipments from,
Cleveland Stevedore and Lederer; (5) by the foregoing conduct Respondents MMP
and Local 47 have engaged in, and induced and encouraged employees of specified
employers to engage in, a strike or concerted refusal to perform services with the
object (a) of forcing or requiring Chicago Calumet, P & V Atlas, and North
Pier to cease doing business with owners of foreign ships, (b) forcing or requiring
customers and carriers to cease doing business with Cleveland Stevedore and
Lederer, and (c) forcing or requiring Cleveland Stevedore and Lederer to cease
doing business with owners of foreign vessels, and (d) by the foregoing conduct,
Respondents have engaged and are engaging in unfair labor practices within the
meaning of Section 8(b)(4)(A) of the Act.
The Respondents filed separate answers in which they admitted the commerce
allegations and that Respondent Johnson was at all material times vice president of
Respondent MMP and president of Respondent Local 47; denied the allegations
that Respondents MMP and Local 47 were labor organizations within the meaning
of the Act and the unfair labor practice allegations; and further denied that Re-
spondent Johnson acted as vice president or agent of Respondent MMP in connec-
tion with any events material to the complaint, averring that Respondent Johnson
acted exclusively as president of Respondent Local 47 in connection with such
events.
Pursuant to due notice, a hearing was held at various intervals during the period
from August 6 to November 20, 1958, at Chicago, Illinois, and Cleveland, Ohio.
All parties were represented at the hearing, and were afforded full opportunity to
be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, to introduce relevant evidence,
to present oral argument, and thereafter to file briefs as well as proposed findings
of fact and conclusions of law. The Respondents' motion to dismiss the complaint,
made at the conclusion of the hearing and upon which I reserved ruling, is granted
in part and denied in part, in accordance with the findings of fact and conclusions
of law made below. On March 9, 1958, the General Counsel and the Respondents
filed briefs, which I have fully considered.
Upon the entire record' in the case, and from my observation of the witnesses,
I make the following:
11 'hereby note and correct the following inconsequential but obvious typographical
errors in the typewritten transcript of the testimony : On page 154, line 16, "removed" is
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 117
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. COMMERCE; THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANIES
Chicago Calumet Stevedoring Co., Inc., herein called Chicago Calumet, and
North Pier Terminal Company, herein called North Pier, are Delaware corporations
engaged in business at Chicago, Illinois. P & V Atlas Maritime Corporation, herein
called P & V Atlas, is a Wisconsin corporation engaged in business at Milwaukee,
Wisconsin. Cleveland Stevedore Company, herein called Cleveland Stevedore, and
Lederer Terminal Warehouse Company, herein called Lederer, are Ohio corpora-
tions, engaged in business at Cleveland, Ohio. At all times material to the com-
plaint, Chicago Calumet, North Pier, P & V Atlas, Cleveland Stevedore, and
Lederer have been engaged in supplying stevedoring services to transportation and
other companies engaged in interstate and/or foreign commerce; in addition each
maintains and operates facilities for the docking of ships, and supplies terminal and
warehouse facilities for goods moving in interstate and/or foreign commerce.
Respondents admit the above commerce allegations of the complaint, including the
fact that each Company received in excess of $200,000 for services rendered in
1957 to various interstate transportation enterprises, each of which in turn re-
ceived in excess of $100,000 for the transportation of products between various
States in the United States and/or between States in the United States and foreign
countries.
Upon the foregoing admitted facts, I find, as Respondents admit in their answers,
that Chicago Calumet, P & V Atlas, North Pier, "Cleveland Stevedore, and Lederer
are each engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act.
H. THE RESPONDENTS
The complaint alleges that Respondent International Organization of Masters,
Mates and Pilots of America, Inc., AFL-CIO, herein called the International or
MMP, and Respondent Great Lakes District, Local No. 47, International Organiza-
tion of Masters, Mates and Pilots of America, Inc., AFL-CIO, herein called District
or Local 47, are each labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of
the Act. The answers deny this allegation. One of the vigorously contested issues
in this proceeding is the status of MMP and Local 47.
The complaint also alleges that Rolla R. Johnson, herein called Johnson or
Captain Johnson, at all times material to the complaint has been vice president of
Respondent MMP and president of Respondent Local 47 and has acted as an agent
for Respondents MMP and Local 47 within the meaning of Sections 2(13) and
8(b) of the Act. Respondent Johnson, in his answer, admits that at all times
material to the complaint he was vice president of Respondent MMP and president
of Respondent Local 47, denies that he at any time acted as vice president or agent
of Respondent MMP in connection with any events material to the complaint, and
avers that he acted exclusively as president of Respondent Local 47 in connection
with such events. Thus, the status of Respondent Johnson as an agent of Respond-
ent MMP is also a contested issue in this proceeding.
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Introduction
As noted in the previous section, there are three Respondents in this proceed-
ing-(1) the International, more commonly referred to as MMP, (2) the Inter-
national's Vice President Rolla R. Johnson, more commonly referred to as Johnson
or Captain Johnson, and (3) a local of the International, more commonly referred
to as Local 47. The principal issues are (1) whether the conduct which occurred
is proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(A) of the Act, (2) whether all Respondents are
liable for any proscribed conduct, and (3) whether MMP and Local 47 are either
labor organizations or agents of labor organizations within the meaning of the
Act. Subsidiary issues are (1) whether Johnson acted as an agent of MMP and
(2) whether pilots who serve on foreign ships navigating on the Great Lakes are
employees within the meaning of the Act.
corrected to read "did not remove" ; page 529, line 23, "1958" is corrected to read "1957" ;
page 577, line 16, "Trial Examiner" is corrected to read "witness" ; page 756, line 8, "to"
is corrected to read "no."
535828-60-vol. 125-9
118 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
B. The relevant events
1. The primary dispute
The Shipping Federation of Canada, herein called the Federation, is an employer
association whose members are various European steamship lines and tramps. Its
function is to "represent the various shipping interests in all matters of importance
pertaining to their interests such as labor problems" and to negotiate labor agree-
ments with various unions. Foreign shippers utilized pilots or sailing masters, as
they are sometimes called, from Kingston, Canada, through the Great Lakes and
back to Kingston. In December 1955, the Great Lakes Pilots Association of
Canada was formed to represent these sailing masters or pilots. Thereafter, the
Great Lakes Pilots Association negotiated with the Federation regarding the pilot-
ing of foreign ships on the Great Lakes, and wages and other rates were established
for the sailing masters or pilots on a Kingston-to-Kingston basis.
In December 1956, the members of the Great Lakes Pilots Association voted to
affiliate with MMP and received a charter as Local 92. About the same time, an
agreement or arrangement was made between Local 47 and Local 92 to the effect
that whenever another pilot was needed, a member of Local 47 would be taken on
pilotage of the Great Lakes Pilots Association until there was an even number of
members from Local 47 and Local 92, or until such time as it became a 50-50 basis.
At the same time, Local 92 asked Johnson, who was vice president of MMP and
president of Local 47, to assist Local 92 in its negotiations with the Federation.
In the fall of 1957, Johnson set up a picket line against various terminals in
Cleveland, Ohio, and longshoremen refused to cross the picket line. This was at a
time when, according to Johnson's testimony, "we were trying to put Americans into
the pilotage district." Thereafter, the Federation received a telegram from "Captain
Roland R. Johnson, International Vice-President Mates and Pilots," demanding that
the Federation "stop discriminating against American pilots and place them immedi-
ately." By telegram dated October 14, 1957, and addressed to Johnson, the Federa-
tion agreed to "recognize International Masters Mates and Pilots Association and
Great Lakes Pilots Association of Canada as bargaining representatives for American
and Canadian Great Lakes sailing masters." Thereafter, the Federation endeavored
to negotiate with Great Lakes Pilots Association, which was then Local 92, but
never agreed to sit down to talk to Johnson during the winter of 1957 or spring
of 1958.
By letter dated February 12, 1958, Great Lakes Pilots Association requested a
meeting with the Federation "to negotiate a contract for the coming season.' 12
Such a meeting was held on March 31. The proposals presented by the Federation
were rejected in a letter dated April 7, 1958, and signed by "Captain Rolla R.
Johnson, President, International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, Great
Lakes District." The Federation responded to the rejection of its proposal in a
telegram to Johnson, dated April 14. Thereafter on April 16, the Federation re-
ceived a telegram from the Great Lakes Pilots Association and another telegram
from "Capt. Rolla R. Johnson, Int. Vice-Pres. Great Lakes MM & P," pointing out
that "any foreign vessel proceeding above Kingston without a pilot will be jeopardiz-
ing the safety of nagivation on the Great Lakes" and threatening that "we will take
any action necessary to prevent this disastrous practice." Johnson's telegram also
reminded the Federation that "you have recognized us as bargaining agent." There
was another telegram to the Federation on April 20, 1958, over the names of
"Capt. Rolla R. Johnson, Capt. J M Andrews,3 International Organization of Masters
Mates and Pilots, Cleveland," pointing out the terms under which pilots for the
Great Lakes were available at Kingston.
Picketing at various locations on the American side began about April 21.
Sometime prior to May 3, Local 92 set up pickets at Kingston. On May 3, 1958,
the Federation and the Great Lakes Pilots Association (Local 92) held another
meeting , which was also attended by Johnson. The parties were unable to reach
agreement on the terms of a contract.
2. Conduct and incidents which are alleged to encompass secondary action
On April 16, 1958, a night letter in the form of a book message, over the name
of "Captain John M. Bishop, Sec. Treas. Intl. Org. Masters, Mates & Pilots," was
sent to the International officers of 12 unions. This night letter stated, "We re-
quest your support in a strike against the foreign shipping companies on the Great
2 The shipping season on the Great Lakes generally runs from April through December.
8 Andrews was president of Local 92, which was the Great Lakes Pilots Association.
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 119
Lakes which appears to be imminent because of their refusal to recognize our
agreement and take pilots." The next day, April 17, an identical telegram was sent
to E. L. Slaughter, secretary-treasurer of the International Brotherhood of Long-
shoremen, AFL-CIO, herein sometimes referred to as IBL.
On April 18, 1958, pursuant to Slaughter's instructions, Slaughter's office sent
out special delivery letters to officers of IBL's geographical Great Lakes district,
enclosing a copy of the Bishop telegram and urging a "vote in favor of supporting
the MM & P in their request," and requesting an immediate reply. Upon receipt
of the votes, Slaughter, on April 21, sent a telegram to five locals of the IBL in the
Great Lakes district, stating that "Masters, Mates and Pilots scheduled to strike
Tonight. By action of the IBL Executive Board, we urge 100 per cent cooperation."
The addressees of this telegram included Local 815 at Milwaukee, Wisconsin,
Local 1317 at Cleveland, Ohio, and Local 19 at Chicago, Illinois. Because the
addressee of Local 19 was an ex-officer, William Green, president of Locals 19
and 1362 at Chicago, called Slaughter's office and stated that "if they wanted the
telegram recognized, they would have to send it to an officer" in charge at that
time. The next day, an identical telegram was sent by Slaughter, addressed to
William Green as president of Locals 19 and 1362. Upon receipt of this telegram,
Green posted it on a bulletin board outside of the local's office "so all the members
could see it."
Johnson was in charge of the strike activity on the American side, operating out
of his office in Cleveland, Ohio. About April 21 or 22, Johnson called Capt. John
Deegan, a member of Local 47, to his office in Cleveland; placed him in charge of
the activities in Chicago, Illinois, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin; gave him the neces-
sary instructions in that regard; and told him that Capt. John Kozak, another
member of Local 47, would meet him in Chicago to assist him. Johnson gave
Deegan about 25 or 30 picket signs, several hundred copies of a news bulletin
dated April 21, and 2 copies of the Bishop night letter.
The picket signs contained the word "STRIKE" on the first line, and the word
"AGAINST" on the second line. Then there was a blank space for the insertion of
the name of a company. After that appeared two lines containing the name
"INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES AND PILOTS."
Under that appeared "A.F. of L.-C.I.O." Johnson instructed Deegan to fold
over the line containing the word "STRIKE," and to insert in the blank space the
words "LOCKOUT BY FOREIGN SHIPS."
The April 21 news bulletin contained the heading "INTERNATIONAL OR-
GANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS-GREAT LAKES DIS-
TRICT," and opened with the statement that "we are now facing one of the
toughest battles since the start of our organization." The bulletin then went on to
explain the dispute concerning the use of pilots on the Great Lakes between the
Pilots Association and "the Shipping Federation of Canada, representatives, of the
foreign flag vessel operators." It characterized the action of foreign flag vessel
operators as a "LOCKOUT" because the foreign vessels were refusing to use any
pilots on the Great Lakes. The bulletin stated that "if the meeting with [Canadian]
ministry of Transport is unsuccessful, immediate action will be taken against all
foreign vessels without pilots," and urged every available member to volunteer his
help because "we will need men in all Ports, although Cleveland, Chicago, Toledo
and Milwaukee will be the most vital points."
Pursuant to Johnson's instructions to Kozak to report to Deegan at the Iliana
Hotel in Chicago, Deegan and Kozak met there on April 22 or 23. At that time
Deegan gave Kozak the picket signs with Johnson's instructions for their prepara-
tion, a copy of the Bishop night letter, and about 150 copies of the April 21 news.
bulletin. Deegan instructed Kozak to attend a meeting with officials of local unions:
in the Chicago area the following day, explaining that he (Deegan) would be un-
able to attend such a meeting because he had to go to Milwaukee. During the
conversation, a telephone call was placed to Johnson in Cleveland and Johnson
was informed of this arrangement. Johnson gave Kozak the names of members of
Local 47 who might be expected to assist in the picketing and, in connection with,
the meeting scheduled for the next morning, instructed Kozak to call Johnson if'
any question arose regarding the manner and method he had outlined to Deegan_
and Kozak to "conduct the pilot picketing action against the foreign flag shipping.
The next day Kozak met in South Chicago with representatives of the Inter-
national Brotherhood of Longshoremen, of the Unlicensed Tugmen's Union, and
of Licensed Tug Officer's Union. The meeting lasted about 2 hours. The union
officials wanted to know "by whose authority" the pilot picket action was being
undertaken. Kozak thereupon showed them Bishop's night letter. During the
discussion, questions arose regarding the picketing, including the question of who
120 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
would do the picketing . In accordance with his prior instructions , Kozak placed a
telephone call to Johnson in Cleveland , and a representative of the Unlicensed
Tugmen and of the Longshoremen participated with Kozak in the conversation
with Johnson. In answer to his query , Green of the IBL was assured by Johnson
that there would be no interference with his men who were engaged in the dis-
charge of cargo from freight cars into warehouse terminals and that we were not
interested in the movement or transfer of such freight at terminals where we would
establish picket lines upon the arrival of a foreign ship.
After the meeting, Kozak prepared the picket signs in accordance with Johnson's
prior instructions to Deegan . The word "STRIKE" was folded over, and the words
"LOCKOUT BY FOREIGN SHIPS" was inserted in the blank space. Kozak also
made arrangements to hire pickets and reported that fact to Johnson . During the
conversation , there was a discussion about the matter of pay for the pickets. Kozak
placed all the pickets in the Chicago area, including Lake Calumet . Johnson then
sent money to Kozak to pay the pickets . Johnson admitted that after Deegan left
Chicago, "Kozak was in charge in this area."
a. Incidents at Milwaukee , Wisconsin
On the morning of April 24, 1958, Deegan went to the offices of Local 815 of
the IBL in Milwaukee , Wisconsin, and there met and conferred with John Brzek,
president of Local 815 and vice president of the International Brotherhood of
Longshoremen . Deegan introduced himself and presented his business card, which
stated that he was a representative of Great Lakes District , International Organiza-
tion of Masters , Mates and Pilots, AFL-CIO. Deegan also gave Brzek a copy of
Johnson 's April 21 news bulletin. Deegan "pointed out what the Masters , Mates,
and Pilots were striking for," that the "Canadian Shipping Federation only wanted
to use pilots part of the ways on the Great Lakes," and also discussed the wage
increases that were sought for the pilots . Deegan then asked for and received
permission to speak to members of Local 815.
Deegan told the members in the union hall that he was "a representative of the
Masters, Mates , and Pilots"; passed out copies of Johnson 's April 21 news bulletin;
volunteered to answer any questions ; explained the issues involved in the dispute;
and tried to enlist their support to respect the picket line . At the end , Deegan "said
that it was entirely up to the men whether they would respect the picket line."
Local 815 has a collective -bargaining agreement with P & V Atlas Maritime
Corporation , herein called P & V Atlas, to supply longshoremen crews. About
12:50 p .m. of that same day, pursuant to the usual practice , a P & V Atlas truck
transported the longshoremen from the union hall to P & V Atlas' transit shed at
Jones Island, Port of Milwaukee . One of the men submitted a slip containing the
names of the longshoremen who were to work that shift to P & V Atlas' Assistant
Supervisor Walsh . A few minutes later, Walsh went out to the dock and read off
the names and crew assignments for specific work aboard the foreign ship,
Veslefjell, which was then at the dock. Although Walsh was following the usual
hiring procedure , none of the longshoremen moved to go to work. The IBL union
steward stepped forward and asked if his name had been called. When he was
answered in the affirmative , he walked toward the gangplank which it was necessary
to use in order to board the vessel , stopped near a picket who was at that location,
and stated that "it looks like they're picketing ." He then rejoined the longshoremen
who continued to stand by without making any effort to go aboard . At that point
Brzek said , "Well, if nobody is going to work, let us go home, let 's get off the
property ." P & V Atlas then transported the men back to the IBL hall. Deegan
was at the picket line when the longshoremen reported for work and while a mem-
ber of the Seafarer 's Union was carrying a picket sign of the type hereinabove de-
scribed, at the Veslef jell's berth . This was a Norwegian vessel which remained at
the P & V Atlas dock until late in the afternoon and then left Milwaukee.
On April 29 , 1958, the German flag vessel , Leana , was at P & V Atlas' Transit
Shed No. 1 in Milwaukee for unloading and loading . About 1 p.m. a crew of
longshoremen was transported from the IBL hall to the P & V Atlas facility, and
a list of the available longshoremen was again presented to Walsh. The men were
grouped near the entrance and near the gangplank . Walsh read the names twice
but none of the longshoremen moved to go to work. At that time there was a
picket at the gangplank to the ship , carrying a picket sign of the type hereinabove
described . When nothing was said, Walsh stated , "If that is it, that is all." The
men were again transported back to the IBL hall.
During the period hereinabove described , P & V Atlas had no dispute with
Local 815.
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 121
b. Incidents at Chicago , Illinois-North Pier
North Pier Terminal Company, herein called North Pier, operates facilities at
400 East South Water Street and Navy Pier in Chicago , Illinois, and at Transit
Shed No. 1 at Lake Calumet , where stevedoring operations are performed. North
Pier has a collective -bargaining agreement with Local 19 of the IBL, covering the
furnishing of longshoremen crews.
North Pier 's hiring practice was to place an order at the union hall before 5 p.m.
on the day preceding an 8 a.m. shapeup . Daily shapeups are also carried on at
1 p.m. and 7 p . m. On April 25 , 1958, North Pier hired a crew of longshoremen
for an 8 a .m. start , and subsequently placed an order for three gangs for 1 p.m. of
the same day . At 12:50 p.m., Raymond Rodriquez , North Pier's dock super-
intendent , hired 28 men to start at 1 p.m. on the foreign motor vessel Luksefjell.
When Rodriquez went out to shape up the longshoremen , he asked IBL Business
Agent Walker "if the men were going to work." Walker replied , "Yes, as long as
there was no one picketing they would work." The crew began work aboard the
Luksefjell and continued until about 4:45 p.m. At that time Captain Kozak ap-
peared on the south side of the dock at East South Water Street with a picket sign
of the type hereinabove described. Shortly thereafter, Eric Harris, house union
steward of Local 19, IBL, went through the warehouse and "up to the ship and
motioned to the ship steward that that was all , it was time to knock off . He gave
a thumb down motion." The longshoremen then left the ship.
After the men left the ship, Rodriquez had a conversation with Kozak and was
shown Kozak's credentials. In reply to Rodriquez ' query as to what Kozak was
doing there, Kozak stated that "he was representing Local 47 of Masters, Mates
and Pilots Union and that they were striking against the foreign ships coming into
Chicago, that he had set up a picket there." Rodriquez explained that North Pier
was operating a general storage and barge terminal as well as a stevedoring terminal,
and asked Kozak to picket some place other than outside the front of North Pier.
Kozak complied with this request , withdrew the picket , and moved to the Illinois
Central property on the west end of North Pier's building.
On April 26 , 1958, North Pier ordered men for an 8 a.m. shapeup , but the men
refused to work. North Pier continued to order men for every shaping period until
the men returned to work about May 5. The Luksefjell, which had arrived on
April 25, remained at the North Pier facilities until May 5 . Other foreign vessels
were also docked at the North Pier facilities during the period from April 25 to
May 5.
During the period hereinabove described , North Pier had no dispute with
Local 19 IBL.
c. Incidents at Chicago, Illinois-Chicago Calumet
Chicago Calumet Stevedoring Co., Inc., herein called Chicago Calumet, operates
a stevedoring facility at No. 3 shed in Lake Calumet, Illinois. Chicago Calumet has
a collective -bargaining agreement with Local 19, IBL, covering the furnishing of
longshoremen crews.
On April 24 , 1958, Stevedoring Superintendent Russo ordered four gangs of long-
shoremen for an 8 a.m. start the next day. On April 25, the Norwegian ship,
Veslef jell, was at the dock in Lake Calumet port. At 7:30 a.m. that day, pickets
were stationed in the roads to the entrance into the port. General Foreman Elizeus
went out to the normal shapeup area, but the men refused to work. The men told
Superintendent Russo that they were not going to cross the picket line . The same
procedure was repeated at 12:50 p.m. ; the men appeared for the shapeup but refused
to go to work.
The Velsefjell remained at the dock and was joined by the Monica Smith and the
SS Lingestrom, both foreign ships, within the next several days. None of the
foreign ships were unloaded until the longshoremen returned to work when the
pickets were removed some 8 or 9 days after April 25.
During the entire period hereinabove described, there was no dispute between
Chicago Calumet and Local 19, IBL.
d. Incidents at Cleveland, Ohio-Lederer
Lederer Terminal Warehouse Company, herein called Lederer, is engaged in the
stevedoring and warehouse business , that is, the loading and unloading of ships and
the handling of cargoes to and from the warehouse into and from vehicles which
travel both by road and by rail. It maintains its facilities in Cleveland , Ohio, for
the storage of goods and for the docking of ships. Lederer has a collective-
122 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
bargaining agreement with Local 1317 IBL, covering the furnishing of longshoremen
crews. During the period hereinafter described, Lederer did not have any dispute
with Local 1317 IBL.
Before picketing commenced at the Lederer premises, Captain Johnson asked
Mr. Lederer for permission to go on the docks and to picket in front of the ships,
explaining that "we weren't interested in anything that was in the warehouse." Mr.
Lederer refused to permit the pickets to go on any of Lederer's property.
There are eight gates through which entrance may be made to Lederer's premises.
These are alphabetically identified on General Counsel's Exhibit No. 36 as Gates A
through H. The easternmost gate is designated as Gate A and is used almost ex-
clusively by ships' personnel going to and from ships located at the docks. Gate B
is used commonly by the public and warehouse company employees going through
the restaurant and subsequently into the east warehouse. Gate C is commonly used
by employees going to and from their employment. Gates D and G are railroad
-entrances used by the railway company for their typical vehicles. The center gates
are designated Gates E and F and are used by truckers of various companies, other
than Lederer, coming in and going to the loading docks to pick up or deliver goods.
Gate H is used by Lederer employees going to the west warehouse and Gate J by
tenants of the west building, as well as those employees who had to go through the
center into the west warehouse. Gate K has been locked for about 2 years.
Most of Lederer's employees who drive to work enter through Gate E. Those
who do not have automobiles usually use Gate B. Crews from ships at dock
normally used Gate A if the ships were tied up on the east side berths. If the
ships were tied up at the north end berth, the crews might walk straight up the road;
if the ships were at the west side berths, the crews might use Gate H. The center
gates, E and F, are used by about 20 to 30 trucks an hour in the morning and by
about 10 to 12 trucks an hour in the afternoon when the traffic quiets down. These
trucks, which belong to practically every trucking company in and out of the State,
use these center gates as entrance to or exit from the loading platforms of either the
east warehouse or the west warehouse. The distance from Gates D, E, F, and G to
the north end of the dock is approximately 700 feet. It is not possible for one
standing at these gates to see ships tied up at either the east or west dock aprons
because of the intervening buildings which are approximately 30 feet high. The
picketing, hereinafter described, covered all gates, with the possible exception of
the westernmost gate, K, which was locked.
The first foreign ship, Luksefjell, tied up at the Lederer dock at 6 p.m. on April 21,
1958. Pickets appeared for the first time at Gate A, the eastern gate, about 7:30 p.m.
and were still there at 11 or 11:30 P.M. On April 26, the foreign vessel, Prins
Frederik Hendrik, tied up at the Lederer dock about 10 a.m. Pickets were present
at the east gate (Gate A) and later moved to the center gates (Gates C, D, E,
and F). The picket sign was of the type previously described. It stated "Locked
out by foreign ship owners, International Organizations of Masters, Mates and
Pilots, AFL-CIO." Bent over the top of the sign, so that it appeared upside down
on the reverse, was a portion with the words, "On Strike." Johnson was present
with the pickets on that day. On April 28, the vessel Turnfjell arrived and tied up
at the western dock. At that time pickets were present at the center gates, E and F.
On April 29, the foreign ship Concordia tied up at the eastern dock. At that time
pickets were present only at the center gates, D, E, and F. On April 30, three
foreign ships arrived, the Suderholm, the Heinrick Udo Schulte, and the Herman
Schulte. The Suderholm departed sometime during that night, but the Herman
Schulte was still tied up on May 1. During that period, pickets appeared at center
gates E and F.
During the periods set forth above, pickets, varying from two to seven on any
given day, carried the above-described signs or stuck their signs against the fence.
The pickets marched back and forth or remained on the sidewalk area separating
the Lederer facilities from Erie Side Avenue, a "very busy street." Lederer's long-
shoremen, who are covered by a collective-bargaining agreement which Lederer has
with Local 1314 IBL, refused to cross the picket line to board the foreign vessels
for unloading and loading.
When approaching trucks of trucking companies were about to enter or to leave
by the center gates, E and F, the pickets stationed themselves on the sidewalk
closest to the street and in many cases "were in the street." On occasions, the pickets
went down into the driveway extending from Gates C through H when trucks
approached, and conversations with truckdrivers took place both within the side-
walk line and also further out in the street, depending on the point at which truck-
drivers entering or leaving the premises stopped. With respect to trucks leaving
the Lederer premises, pickets simply spoke to the drivers; on at least two or three
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 123
occasions after such conversations, the drivers dismounted from the cab and, accom-
panied by the pickets, opened up the rear gate of the vehicles and displayed the
merchandise which they had picked up from Lederer's warehouse.
. On April 29, a driver from Federal Express, Inc., pulled up to the truck gate
entrance about 9:30 a.m. to make a delivery to Lederer Terminal. About six or
seven pickets, without signs, were present in front of the gate. The driver did not
know what was going on and asked them "what the trouble was." The only response
came from one of the pickets who said that "they were just trying to keep the trucks
out." When asked on cross-examination if he did not know that there was a ship
tied up, the driver credibly testified, "No, I didn't. I'm not supposed to know if
there is a ship there or not. All I'm supposed to do is deliver freight there." The
driver did not cross the picket line because "members of Local 47 of the Teamsters
Union don't cross picket lines" and "if I see five or six men there and whether there
is a sign or not I'm still not going in."
On April. 30, the pickets stopped the following five trucks as they attempted to
enter the center gates to Lederer's premises; these were trucks owned by Valley
Freight Lines, Lake Erie Freight Lines, Cleveland Buffalo Freight Lines, Saunders
Cartage Freight Lines, and a cab or tractor owned by Greely Warehouse. The
trucks stopped when "there was a man who stood in front of the gates with his arms
crossed and refused to move from in front of the truck which was trying to gain
access." Once the truck stopped, persons previously seen carrying picket signs
walked over to the cab of the truck and talked to the driver. The following is
typical of the conversations which took place: The picket would ask the driver
"what kind of a union man he was that he would cross a picket line?" The driver
would reply that he was "here to pick up some cargo from the warehouse." The
picket would then ask the driver if the cargo came "from a foreign vessel," where-
upon the driver would reply that he did not know. In each case the truckdriver
did not pass the gate and enter the premises to pick up or deliver cargo from or to
the warehouse.
Also on April 30, a driver from Federal Express, Inc., approached the Lederer
premises to make a delivery to the warehouse, stopped his truck opposite the center
gates but across the Erie Side Avenue because he saw "fellows walking the sign in
front of the Lederer Terminal, the entrance, and they had it that they were on
strike." One of the pickets walked over and asked the driver, "you ain't going
through the line?" The driver replied that he did not know, walked into the
office, handed his bills to the man in charge, and called his dispatcher. The result
was that the driver did not enter the Lederer premises with his truck. He knew there
was a strike there "because it was supposed to be the pilots against something."
About 4:30 p.m. on May 1, a truckdriver from the Shoemauker Company of
Canton, Ohio, was stopped at the center gates to the Lederer premises. In reply to
questions from a picket, the driver stated where he came from and "that he was
there to pick up some merchandise from the warehouse." The picket asked the
driver several times, "are you going to cross the picket line?" The driver replied,
"I've instructions that I am either to pick up the cargo or be fired." The picket then
asked the driver if he had his union card with him, and stated that he wanted to
have the driver's name and number if he crossed the picket line. The driver handed
his union card to the picket who made notations from it and returned it to the driver
who climbed into the cab and began to start his truck. At that point, the picket told
the driver that "he was to stop on his way out" so that the picket could see what type
of cargo he was taking from the warehouse. The driver then entered the Lederer
premises, transacted his business, and on his way out stopped his truck at the
gates in the street proper. The pickets went to the truck, opened the tailgates,
climbed into the truck and then climbed down again, and closed the tailgates. The
driver then left.
Other trucks stopped on May 1 included the Valley Freight Lines, the Baltimore-
Pittsburgh Freight Company, and another Federal Express truck. In each case, the
driver refused to cross the picket line. When the Federal Express driver was asked
by a picket if he was going to cross the picket line, a Lederer representative in-
quired about the nature of the cargo the driver was to pick up. The driver replied
that it was simply merchandise and that he did not know whether or not it came
from a foreign ship. Upon checking, the Lederer representative told the driver and
the pickets that it was storage merchandise which came in by some method other
than foreign ships. The driver nevertheless refused to cross the picket line.
During the course of the picketing, "a sort of gentlemen's agreement" evolved
between the pickets and a Lederer official to the effect that, where the cargo in-
volved either came from or was destined for foreign ships, the trucks "would not
necessarily have to cross the picket line," and that the Lederer official would inform
124 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the driver and the pickets of the nature of the cargo . However, drivers who were
approached by the pickets refused to cross the picket line regardless of what the
Lederer official told them about the nature of the cargo , and in some cases the
pickets themselves would not accept the official 's word that the cargo involved was
storage material.
e. Incidents at Cleveland , Ohio-Cleveland Stevedore
Cleveland Stevedore Company, herein called Cleveland Stevedore , is engaged in
the warehousing and stevedoring business and, in connection therewith , operates a
riverfront terminal and warehouse facilities at Cleveland , Ohio. The riverfront
terminal is bounded on one side by the Cuyahoga River , with intervening docks at
which foreign ships tie up next to the warehouse , and by Main Avenue, a municipal
street roughtly perpendicular to the river. The building runs north and south along
the Cuyahoga River , with a truckloading dock facing on Main Avenue where trucks
normally come to pick up and unload material . Main Avenue in front of the ware-
house is also utilized by National Terminals Corporation , located across the street
and down the river from Cleveland Stevedore , and by the State highway.
Before any picketing began at the Cleveland Stevedore premises , Captain Johnson
asked Louis Ronald Hicks , superintendent of Cleveland Stevedore , for permission to
picket on the dock apron in front of the ships . Hicks stated that he could not permit
picketing on company property and that the men would have to stay outside the
warehouse.4
On April 28 , 1958 , the foreign vessel Prins Frederik Hendrik arrived about 8 a.m.
and tied up at the number 1 position on the Cuyahoga River. Pickets appeared at
the dock gate , used jointly by employees , longshoremen , and personnel of ships, and
walked back and forth across the gate entrance with a sign of the type previously
described and used at Lederer. This ship was still present on April 29. Other
foreign vessels were tied up on April 29, May 1, and May 2. Cleveland Stevedore
longshoremen , who are covered by a collective -bargaining agreement which Cleve-
land Stevedore has with Local 1317 IBL, refused to cross the picket line.
On April 29, in addition to picketing in front of the dock gate, the pickets began
the practice of leaving the gate and going over to trucks backed up to the dock and
carrying on conversations with drivers of the trucks . Following one of these con-
versations , the truckdriver left without picking up or delivering merchandise to the
terminal. While at the truck dock, it was not possible for anyone on the foreign.
ship to see the pickets , nor could the pickets see the foreign ships.
Thereafter , pickets also appeared on Main Avenue to talk to truckdrivers who
stopped. From where the pickets were on Main Avenue , they could neither observe
the foreign ships nor could anyone on the foreign ships observe the trucks or the
picket line. The picket who took up a position on Main Avenue would wave a
picket sign over his head at the approach of a truck . Once the truck stopped, the
picket would carry on a conversation with the truckdriver . The truck would then
turn around and leave without loading or discharging . All trucks approaching the
riverfront must of necessity come down Main Avenue . This happened in the case
of about five trucks on May 1 and five trucks on May 2 , including trucks owned by
American Rubber Company, S. J. Kiebler Brothers , Warner and Smith Truck
Transport , Brewer Trucking Company , and Norwalk Truck Lines , Inc. On three of
these occasions , the driver left his truck and entered the premises to make an in-
quiry or a telephone call, and then left without picking up or delivering any
merchandise.
C. The legality of the conduct
The findings hereinabove set forth are based on undisputed evidence and are not
seriously contested . The only issue with respect to them is whether such conduct
constitutes lawful primary activity or whether it falls within the proscription of
Section 8 (b) (4) (A) of the Act.
This case involves a mobile or ambulatory situs of a primary . dispute. The
foreign vessels were the situs of the primary dispute with the foreign shipowners con-
cerning the use of pilots on the Great Lakes. These foreign vessels continued to be
4 These findings are based on Johnson ' s testimony , which was not directly denied by
Hicks. Mr. Hicks testified that he remembered talking to Johnson at the dock on April 24,
1958, but did not remember whether Johnson asked for permission to picket on the dock
site and whether he replied that he could not give such permission . He admitted, how-
ever , that " it is possible" that it could have happened that way. It was not denied that
during a 1957 dispute with Cleveland Stevedore, after Johnson had a conversation with
Hicks, the men picketed on the apron dock and not in front of the terminal.
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 125
the situs of the primary dispute when, in the course of normal business, they from
time to time came to rest temporarily at the docks or premises of secondary em-
ployers, who were not involved in the primary dispute. In these circumstances,
picketing will be primary and lawful if it meets all of the following conditions estab-
lished by the Board in the case of Moore Dry Dock Company, 92 NLRB 547, 549.
(a) The picketing is strictly limited to times when the situs of dispute is
located on the secondary employer's premises;
(b) At the time of the picketing the primary employer is engaged in its nor-
mal business at the situs;
(c) The picketing is limited to places reasonably close to the location of the
situs; and
(d) The picketing discloses clearly that the dispute is with the primary
employer.
In speaking of these standards in a subsequent case (Retail Fruit & Vegetable
Clerks' Union, Local 1017, et al. (Retail Fruit Dealers' Association of San Fran-
cisco, Inc.), 116 NLRB 856 at 859), the Board stated:
In developing and applying these standards, the controlling consideration has
been to require that the picketing be so conducted as to minimize its impact on
neutral employees insofar as this can be done without substantial impairment
of the effectiveness of the picketing in reaching the primary employees. [The
Board's emphasis.]
The General Counsel contends in his brief that all of the Moore Dry Dock re-
quirements have not been met because the "picketing was not limited to places
reasonably close to the location of the situs [of the primary dispute], and the picket-
ing did not clearly disclose that the dispute was with the primary employer."
I now turn to a consideration of whether the record supports the General Counsel's
contention.
1. At Chicago and Milwaukee
The record shows that the picketing in Milwaukee was conducted in front of the
foreign vessel on the dock of P & V Atlas. At Chicago, the pickets were not per-
mitted on the premises of North Pier and Chicago Calumet 5 and therefore the
picketing took place as close to the foreign ships as it was possible to get without
trespassing on private property. Captain Kozak, a witness for the General Counsel,
was in charge of placing the pickets in the Chicago area. He testified that in every
instance he consulted the terminal officials, that these officials informed him of the
line of demarcation between their private property and the city property, and that in
every instance the pickets got as close to the foreign vessel, without trespassing on
private property, as it was legally permissible for them to be. Dock Superintendent
Rodriquez of North Pier and Stevedoring Superintendent Russo of Chicago Calumet,
both witnesses for the General Counsel, admitted that at all times the pickets were
as close to the dock and the foreign vessels as they were allowed to get. Thus, the
record clearly demonstrates, and I find, contrary to the General Counsel's contention,
that at Chicago, Illinois, and at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the picketing was at all times
limited to places reasonably close to the foreign ships, the situs of the primary
dispute.
The picket signs carried by the pickets clearly disclosed that the dispute was with
the foreign ships. In other words, the foreign ships, not the terminal or warehouse
or stevedoring companies, were declared "hot." The Bishop night letter, which was
sent to International officers of various unions, including those of the International
Brotherhood of Longshoremen, and which was shown by Kozak to the representa-
tives of the IBL and of the other two unions with whom he met in Chicago, clearly
stated that the strike which was imminent would be against foreign shipping com-
panies because of their refusal to use pilots. Also, when Deegan spokes to President
Brzek and members of Local 815 IBL in the union hall, he passed out copies of the
Johnson April 21 news bulletin, which gave a detailed account of the nature of the
dispute with the foreign shipowners. Deegan also orally explained the issues in-
volved in the dispute with the foreign shipowners. His talk and conduct at the
union meeting obviously constituted an appeal to the longshoremen not to cross the
picket line at the situs of the primary dispute in order to work on the foreign
5 Dock Superintendent Rodriquez of North Pier admitted that he first saw Kozak "on
the south side of our dock" and that Kozak complied with Rodriquez' request to picket off
their premises. Captain Johnson testified, without contradiction, that Hogan, who was
in charge of the dock at Chicago Calumet, had "refused to consider letting us on the
property."
126 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
vessels, so long as the picket line continued. Thereafter, the picket lines at
Milwaukee and Chicago were respected by IBL longshoremen, employed by sec-
ondary employers to board the foreign vessels for the purpose of unloading and
loading.
In my opinion, the foregoing conduct is governed by the Board's decisions in The
Pure Oil Company, 84 NLRB 315; Moore Dry Dock Company, supra; and Inter-
borough News Company, 90 NLRB 2135.
In the Pure Oil case, supra, at page 319, there was a primary strike against Standard
Oil and pickets were posted at the Standard Oil premises, including the refinery and
the entrance to the dock. The respondent union in that case then sent letters to the
National Maritime Union, stating in effect that the Standard Oil dock was "hot" and
requesting that Pure Oil cargo not be handled on the Standard dock. The Board
held that the "union's letters were appeals to refuse to perform services only at the
Standard Oil Dock" and that these appeals, like the picketing, "amounted to nothing
more than a request to respect a primary picket line at the Employer's premises."
In Moore Dry Dock, the respondent union had a primary dispute with the
owners of the vessel Phopho, which was docked at the Moore premises and upon
which Moore's employees were doing repair work, and was picketing Moore's
premises. The respondent union sent letters to other unions, including the unions
representing Moore's employees, declaring the Phopho to be "hot" because of the
dispute with its operator, and requesting their cooperation. Representatives of re-
spondent union also made a similar appeal for cooperation to other locals at the
premises of Moore and appeared at a meeting of the Trades Council, where they
explained the dispute with the operator of the Phopho and requested the Council's
cooperation. The Council went on record as supporting the respondent union in its
dispute with the Phopho, and other locals pulled their members, employed by Moore,
off the Phopho. All work by Moore employees ceased on the Phopho and requests
for other men to work an the Phopho were not complied with by other locals (92
NLRB at pp. 561-562). The Board, pointing out that the union was careful to
indicate that its dispute was solely with the primary employer, the owner of the
Phopho, agreed with the Trial Examiner that the "hot" letters and "appeals" for
cooperation to Moore employees and the other unions incited action only at the situs
of the dispute and "therefore under the holding in the Pure Oil case they must be
considered as primary action" (92 NLRB at pp. 551-552).
In the Interborough News case, supra, the respondent union induced its member
employees of secondary employers to refuse to deliver newspapers to subway news-
stands operated by Interborough News Company, with with the respondent was
engaged in a labor dispute. Here also, the Board "agree[d] with the Trial Examiner's
conclusion that because the respondent's conduct in such inducement invited action
only at the premises of the primary employer, whose employees were on strike, it
was not violative of Section 8(b)(4)(A)," again citing the Pure Oil Co. case.
So too in the instant case, it was at all times made clear that the dispute was with
the foreign shipowners; it was the foreign ships which were declared to be "hot";
and the inducement of other union members and of secondary employees invited
their action of refusing to perform services only on the foreign vessels, the situs of
the primary disputes In line with the Board's decisions, hereinabove set forth,
I find that the conduct, which occurred at Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and Chicago,
Illinois, was primary, lawful activity not proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(A) of the
Act, and that the impact on the secondary employers was merely incidental to the
primary picketing.?
2. At Cleveland, Ohio
The conduct engaged in by the pickets at the premises of Lederer and Cleveland
Stevedore was of the type proscribed by Section 8(b)(4)(A) of the Act in the
following respects:
(a) The pickets actively induced and encouraged employees of secondary em-
ployers to refuse to handle cargo, which came from or was destined for foreign
ships, at the sites of the secondary employer; truckdrivers of customers and sup-
6 It is in this respect that The Humko Co., Inc., case, 121 NLRB 1414, is distinguishable.
For in the Humko case, the inducement of secondary employees at a union meeting in-
vited their action of refusing to handle the goods of Humko (the primary employer) at
the premises of the secondary employer.
7 Thus the neutral employers, P & V Atlas, North Pier, and Chicago Calumet, had no
more adverse effects than they would have suffered had they been working on the foreign
vessels at (locks owned by the owners of the foreign vessels and had the picketing been at
those docks. Seafarers International Union of North America, et at. v. N.L.R.B. (Salt
Dome Production Co.), 265 F. 2d 585 (C.A., D.C.).
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 127
pliers of Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore, who were seeking to enter the premises
for the purpose of picking up cargo from or delivering cargo to the warehouse,
were directly and affirmatively induced by pickets to refrain from entering the
premises where the cargo involved came from or was destined for a foreign vessel.
Unlike the situation of the longshoremen who had to board and perform their work
on the foreign vessel, the situs of the primary dispute, the truckdrivers transact their
business exclusively at the warehouse and terminals of Lederer and Cleveland
Stevedore, premises of the secondary employers not involved in the primary dispute.
To this extent, the pickets were engaging in a product boycott which, contrary to
Respondents' contention, is unlawful insofar as it involved employees of secondary
neutral employers .8 In these circumstances, the conduct was no different from the
typical secondary boycott of nonunion goods involved and found unlawful by the
Board and the courts in numerous cases.
(b) The picketing was not limited to places reasonably close to the location of
the situs of the primary dispute: Although picketing outside the premises of Lederer
and Cleveland Stevedore was proper because permission to enter the premises and
pickets in front of the ships was denied, the picketing was not confined to areas which
would have adequately publicized the dispute with the foreign shipowners. Thus at
Lederer, the picketing was extended, and sometimes exclusively confined, to the
center gates, E and F, used by truckdrivers of secondary employers to enter the
premises to transact business with Lederer, another secondary employer. Since the
longshoremen and ships' personnel enter the premises through the other gates, it is
clear that a picket line confined to such gates would have adequately publicized the
dispute with the foreign shippers. Moreover, the gates were not so far apart that
those few employees of Lederer and of foreign shipowners who might enter through
Gates E and F could not fail to see the picket line at the other gates. The extension
of the picket line to Gates E and F was adeliberate atempt to impose the necessity
of crossing a picket line upon the bulk of the traffic through those gates, including
necessarily employees of neutral trucking companies doing business with Lederer,
another neutral.9 Thus the record shows that truckdrivers refused to cross the picket
line to enter the Lederer premises through Gates E and F, even in those cases where
the cargo involved was not foreign cargo and despite the assurance of a Lederer
official that the cargo involved was storage material. This is so because of the well-
known reluctance of union men to cross a picket line of any kind. The same was
true at Cleveland Stevedore where the pickets left the gates to go to the truck dock
and into Main Avenue, there waved down approaching trucks with their picket
signs, and actively induced and encouraged the truckdrivers not to drive to the truck
docks at Cleveland Stevedore's warehouse.
(c) The pickets did not at all times disclose clearly that the dispute was with the
foreign shipowners, the primary employer. On many occasions, one of the men
would stand in front of the Lederer truck gate, without a picket sign, and refuse to
move from in front of trucks trying to gain access, while persons previously carrying
picket signs would affirmatively induce the drivers not to enter to pick up or deliver
foreign cargo from or to the Lederer warehouse. On one such occasion, when a
Federal Express driver pulled up to the truck gate to make a delivery to the Lederer
terminal, about six or seven pickets, without signs, were present in front of the gate.
The driver asked them "what was the matter," and was merely informed that "they
were just trying to keep the trucks out." On another occasion, a Federal Express
driver stopped his truck and went to the picket line to inquire what it was all about.
Before he could make an inquiry, he was asked by a picket, "You ain't going through
the line?" The Board has held that when neutral employees ask questions about
the dispute, pickets may not give an evasive answer but have an obligation to make
clear that the picketing is not directed against them in order to dispel or mitigate
the effect which such picketing could reasonably be expected to have on the em-
ployees of neutral employers.10 This the pickets failed to do in the instant case.
In view of all the foregoing conduct set forth in (a), (b), and (c), above, and
upon the basis of the entire record considered as a whole, I find that the pickets at
Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore did not conduct themselves in such a way as to
8 See, e.g., Washington-Oregon Shingle Weavers' District Council, et al. (Sound Shingle
Co.), 101 NLRB 1159, enfd. 211 F. 2d 149 (C.A. 9).
8 Retail Fruit & Vegetable Clerks' Union, Local 1017, et at. (Retail Fruit Dealers
Association of San Francisco, Inc.), 116 NLRB 856, 859, 861, enfd. 249 F. 2d 591
W.A. 9) ; Amarillo General Drivers, et at . (Crowe-Gulde Cement Company), 122
NLRB 1275.
io Seafarers' International Union, etc. (Superior Derrick Corporation), 122 NLRB 52;
Amarillo General Drivers, at at ., supra; Richfield Oil Corporation, 95 NLRB 1191.
128 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
minimize the impact on neutral employees, although this could have been done with-
out substantial impairment of the effectiveness of the picketing in reaching the pri-
mary employees or those performing services at the situs of the primary employer,
the consideration held by the Board to be controlling in developing and applying the
Moore Dry Dock standards.1' Here the impact on the neutral secondary employers
was not merely incidental to primary picketing, but was intentional and deliberate.
It is also clear, and I find, that at least one object, if not the only object, of the
picketing was to force or require the trucking companies to cease doing business
with Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore and to force or require Lederer and Cleveland
Stevedore to cease doing business with the foreign shipowners.
I find that the pickets engaged in conduct proscribed in Section 8(b)(4)(A) of
the Act by inducing and encouraging the employees of trucking companies doing
business with Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore to engage in concerted refusals in the
course of their employment to handle commodities or to perform services with an
object of (1) forcing or requiring the trucking companies to cease doing business
with Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore, and (2) forcing or requiring Lederer and
Cleveland Stevedore to cease doing business with the foreign shipowners.
D. Liability for the conduct proscribed in Section 8(b)(4)(A)
Respondents concede that Local 47 and its agent, Captain Johnson, are liable for
the picketing and the conduct of the pickets at the premises of Lederer and Cleveland
Stevedore in Cleveland, Ohio, conduct hereinabove found to be proscribed in Sec-
tion 8(b)(4)(A) of the Act. They deny, however, that MMP, the International,
is liable for such conduct or that Johnson at any time material to the complaint acted
as an agent of MMP. The General Counsel contends that MMP and Local 47 acted
in concert in pursuit of a common objective and "were and are engaged in a joint
venture in the dispute with the foreign ship owners," and that Johnson acted as the
agent of both Local 47 and MMP in this venture. Consequently, the General
Counsel argues, each organization was an agent of the other and, together with
Johnson, responsible for the conduct of all. In support of his position, the General
Counsel relies on the provisions of the constitution of MMP and Local 47, and the
actual participation by each in the relevant conduct.
The relevant provisions of the constitution of MMP and Local 47 are set forth
in appendixes B and C, attached to this report. MMP's constitution (article II,
section 2) provides that members of the MMP "shall be divided into Local Sub-
ordinate Associations" and for the segregation of subordinate locals into districts
under the supervision of one or two International vice presidents. Article III, sec-
tion 1, provides: "(a) Every Subordinate Local shall hereafter be known by the
following: INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES AND
PILOTS, LOCAL NO. __," and for the setting up of the subordinate locals. Sec-
tion 4 of article III requires that the Local "shall arrange for and have all their
officers who are entrusted with the finances of such Local bonded." 12 Article IV,
section 1, sets forth the mechanical requirements for admission to membership in a
local. Section 6 of that article provides that "Each member, immediately after his
initiation shall be handed a copy of the International Constitution and By-Laws and
he shall sign receipt for same." Article IV also carefully prescribes the membership
which locals may admit or accept, including regular and probationary members and
permit holders. Article VIII, section 1, provides that "the authority and power of
this organization is vested in the members thereof acting by and through their duly
elected or appointed officers and delegates meeting in Convention assembled," and
further states that the convention is "the source of all true and legitimate authority
over the organization and possesses as such supreme and absolute power over same
and all channels leading thereto." Section 3 of that article provides that the Inter-
national executive committee is clothed with all of the powers of MMP during such
times when the convention is not in session. Article X prescribes the minimum
initiation fees and dues to be charged by the locals and grants the International
president the power to waive initiation fees. Article XI, section 6, provides that
the International executive committee "shall have power between Conventions .
to recommend the calling of a strike in a dispute over which the International
Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, Inc., has jurisdiction." Article XIII,
section 8, gives the International president the full power to investigate the books
and affairs "of any Local as he may desire" and to appoint trustees. Article XVIII,
-Retail Fruit d Vegetable Clerks' Union, Local 1017, et al. (Retail Fruit Dealers
Association of San Francisco, Inc.), supra.
12 1 note that Johnson is also acting as secretary-treasurer of Local 47.
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS , MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 129
section 4, provides that any local violating orders of the International president or
the International executive committee may be suspended or dissolved and its funds
and property taken over by MMP. While locals have authority to negotiate con-
tracts , article XIX provides that such agreements must be made in the name of the
MMP and no agreement may be signed by a local officer without receiving the
consent of the International president or International vice president of the district.
Article XXIII provides that no local may adopt or amend its own bylaws without
the written approval of the International president , attested to by the International
secretary -treasurer . Section 2 of that article provides that "any article in the
By-Laws of any Local conflicting with this constitution is hereby repealed and no
Local shall alter or amend any part of this constitution ." Moreover , any bylaws,.
rules, and regulations adopted by locals are subject to the approval of the Inter-
national president and secretary -treasurer provided "always, however , that no By
Laws , rules and regulations shall be approved which are in contravention to any
provision in this constitution."
The constitution and bylaws of Local 47 point up the interrelation and dove-
tailing of constitutional provisions . Thus, article XVI provides that the initiation fee
in the local "shall not be less than that provided for in the International Constitution
of Masters , Mates and Pilots." Section 3 of that article provides that "all members
in arrears shall be governed by the International Constitution , International Organi-
zation of Masters, Mates and Pilots. " Article IV , section 1, provides that member-
ship transfers to other locals shall be issued in accordance with the provisions in the
International 's (MM P 's) constitution . Article VII provides for nomination and elec-
tion of delegates to the MMP convention . According to article XIV, section 7,
appeals from convictions in a trial by Local 47 are made to the executive board or
convention of MMP. Article XIX, sections 1 and 2, provide for the calling of a
strike and that "such strike shall receive the indorsement of the International Execu-
tive Committee of the International Organization of Masters , Mates and Pilots."
The constitution and bylaws of Local 47 were approved by Capt. T. C . Atkins,
International president , and executive board.
Changes in the International constitution are included separately in the constitu-
tion and bylaws of Local 47 . One such change is the amendment of article X,
section 1 ( b), to show the increase in initiation fees for offshore locals , effective
January 1, 1957. Another change , which shows the authority granted by the Inter-
national to local officers and which recognizes the authority inherent in the holding
of a local office with relation to the International ( MMP), is the amendment to
article XXIV , section 2 . This amendment authorizes "the officials of each Local .
to use every precaution to avoid situations that may cause suits to the Locals or the
International Organization."
It is apparent , and I find, that the provisions of the constitution and bylaws of
MMP and Local 47, hereinabove summarized and set forth in more detail in ap-
pendixes B and C , not only disclose that the International exercises substantial con-
trol over the organization and internal operations and functions of Local 47 , but also
demonstrate the interdependent and intermeshed character of the two organizations.
A realistic appraisal of the motives of the Respondents in relation to the overall
objective is a relevant consideration in determining the responsibility for the conduct
involved.13 Such an appraisal discloses the community of interest , common to
MMP and Local 47, in the activities and pressures brought to bear on the foreign
shipowners through the instrumentality of Johnson , president of Local 47 and vice
president of MMP in charge of the Great Lakes district, which included Locals
47 and 92. It is clear that the object of all Respondents was to force certain eco-
nomic concessions from the foreign shipowners . Local 47's interest was in behalf
of its members , itself, and of its sister local, Local 92 . MMP's interest was one of
protecting the interests of its membership 14 and of the membership of Locals 47 and
92 as to availability , tenure , and conditions of employment in the marine field.15
This was early demonstrated by the telegram in the fall of 1947, which was sent by
Johnson as International vice president and which demanded that the Federation
"stop discriminating against American pilots and place them immediately." MMP
13Los Angeles Building and Construction Trades Council , AFL, at at. ( Standard Oil
Company of California ), 105 NLRB 868, 874.
14 The record shows that one becomes a member of MMP by becoming a member of a
local.
is Thus, the preamble to the constitution of M5IP states : "We the officers of the mer-
chant marine:-for the better regulations of matters pertaining to our crafts , the elevation
of our standing as such and our character as men do ordain and establish this constitu-
tion of the International Organization of Masters , Mates and Pilots, Inc."
130 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
further identified itself with the primary dispute when on April 16, 1958, the Federa-
tion received a telegram from Johnson as International vice president, pointing out
that "any foreign vessel proceeding above Kingston without a pilot will be jeopardiz-
ing the safety of navigation on the Great Lakes" and threatening that "we will take
any action necessary to prevent this disastrous practice." [Emphasis supplied.]
The record shows that the above threat was implemented by joint action of MMP
and Local 47 in a concerted effort to attain their common objective. As the General
Counsel states in his brief, MMP's active participation in and support of the strike
or dispute and its concomitant picketing is best illustrated by the April 16 and 17
telegrams, over the name of Bishop, secretary-treasurer of MMP, to officials of other
maritime labor organizations, soliciting support. These wires were sent prior to the
inception of picketing at any American ports and clearly identified MMP with the
dispute and the activities to be carried on in connection therewith. Thus, they state,
among other things, that "we request" your support because of refusal "to recognize
our agreements." [Emphasis supplied.] These wires were sent by Bishop's secre-
tary from his office in Washington, D.C., at the request of Johnson, who was known
to the secretary to be a vice president of MMP. Johnson admitted that it was the
common practice for such wires to issue in the name of Bishop when an International
vice president requests Bishop's secretary to send a wire, even though no request is
made that Bishop's name appear thereon. Johnson further admitted that any wire
emanating from Bishop's office comes from Bishop. Moreover, Bishop at no time
repudiated the use of his name on these wires, although he later became aware of it.
Under all the circumstances disclosed by the record, I find that the secretary had
prior authority of Bishop to act in his behalf in sending these wires, and that Johnson
was aware of it and knew that the wires would be issued in Bishop's name. Johnson
gave copies of these wires to Deegan and Kozak for the purpose of proving to
officials of other unions, whose support was being sought, that the proposed picket
action was authorized by, and had the support of, MMP. Thus, as previously found,
when Kozak met with officials of IBL and other unions in Chicago and was asked
"by whose authority" the pilot picket action was being undertaken, Kozak showed
them the copies of the Bishop night letters which satisfied them that it was by the
authority of MMP.
Moreover, Johnson admitted in a newsletter directed to the members of Local 47
and dated July 1, 1958, that "the strike was sanctioned by the International and
nothing was done that they weren't fully aware of. As in any strike, sometimes
drastic action has to be taken immediately." At the hearing, Johnson admitted that
on two occasion he talked to Captain Bishop, secretary-treasurer of MMP, about
the strike to "exchange ideas with one another and we are helpful to one another,"
that one occasion was when Johnson was in Montreal and the other occasion was
"the time about 3 days after the strike was on." He explained that the usual prac-
tice was to keep the secretary-treasurer of MMP fully informed about what had been
done, that he in turn informs the executive board of MMP, and that when the
executive board takes no action opposing the strike, it meant that it is sanctioned
by MMP. Johnson admitted that he followed the usual practice in this case; that
he explained to Bishop about the strike and what had been done; and that the execu-
tive board of MMP took no adverse action; thereby sanctioning the strike. Further-
more,.Johnson admitted to Deegan and Kozak that the strike and picket action had
been sanctioned by the International. 16
MMP's participation in the picketing activities is also demonstrated by the picket
signs used by the pickets at Cleveland, Chicago, and Milwaukee. These signs at all
times bore only the name of the International, MMP, and Johnson was fully aware
of this fact. Although, pursuant to Johnson's instructions, the word "strike" was
bent over and the words "Lockout by Foreign Ships" were inserted, Johnson ad-
mittedly gave no instructions to insert the name of Local 47 anywhere on the picket
signs. On the contrary, when Kozak asked Johnson in one of the telephone con-
versations why the picket signs did not contain the name of Local 47, Johnson
stated that the signs were just the way he wanted them to read and that he did not
want Local 47's name on the picket signs.17 Nor did MMP ever repudiate the use
of its name on these signs.
10 Based on the credible testimony of Deegan and Kozak. I do not credit Johnson's
denials, particularly since such action is consistent with Johnson's admissions and the
requirement in Local 47's constitution that "such strike shall receive the endorsement of
the International Executive Committee."
17 Based on the credible testimony of Kozak. I do not credit Johnson's denial in this
respect.
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 131
The record also shows that MMP assisted Local 47 financially during the strike.
Johnson admitted that when Kozak telephoned to him and asked about the money
to pay the pickets in Chicago, he told Kozak that "we were getting awfully low and
would have to get after the International to help us out." During April or May 1958,
MMP sent $2,000 to Local 47. This money was never accounted for, but was used
in part either to pay the pickets or as replacement for money withdrawn by Local 47
.from its treasury to pay the pickets. Johnson further admitted that MMP is being
billed for the total cost of the strike, about $8,000.
Captain Johnson was the directing force in the entire enterprise on the American
:side. He was president of Local 47 and vice president of MMP in charge of the
Great Lakes district, which included Locals 47 and 92. His activities in connection
with the dispute and the picket action have already been described. In addition, he
was physically present both during and prior to the inducement and encouragement
of employees of neutral employers at Cleveland, Ohio. Throughout his activities,
Johnson did nothing to insulate MMP from the dispute but, on the contrary,
affirmatively drew it into the dispute. On the one hand, he invoked the name,
weight, and prestige of MMP to further the effectiveness of the action directed
against the foreign shipowners; on the other hand, he did little or nothing to point
up that Local 47 was a major participant in the dispute.
Upon consideration of all the foregoing and the entire record as a whole, I am
convinced and find that MMP and Local 47 were engaged throughout their activity,
including the unlawful conduct, in a joint venture relationship to bring economic
pressure to bear against the foreign shipowners to compel them to recognize their
agreements and to make certain concessions concerning the use of pilots on the
Great Lakes. In pursuit of the common venture, each is an agent of the other and
equally responsible for the conduct committed by the group in pursuing the common
objective.18
I therefore find that the International, MMP, is responsible for the conduct at
Cleveland, Ohio, hereinabove found to have been proscribed in Section 8(b) (4) (A)
,of the Act, and that Local 47 is responsible for such conduct not only as a principal
but also as an agent of MMP. I further find that Johnson acted in this joint venture
not only as an agent of Local 47 but also as an agent of MMP, within the meaning
.of Sections 2(13) and 8(b) of the Act, and therefore is equally responsible for
such conduct.
E. Status of MMP and Local 47 as labor organizations
As the unfair labor practices proscribed in Section 8(b)(4)(A) of the Act may
be committed only by a "labor organization or its agents," it becomes necessary to
determine whether MMP and Local 47 are labor organizations within the meaning
of the Act or acted as agents of such labor organizations. It is the Respondents'
position that MMP and Local 47 are not labor organizations because the pilots in-
volved in the dispute, according to Respondents, are not employees within the
meaning of the Act. The General Counsel contends that MMP is a labor organiza-
tion, regardless of the status of pilots, and that, in any event, the pilots are em-
ployees within the meaning of the Act. For reasons hereinafter indicated, I find it
unnecessary to determine the employee status of pilots.
1. As to MMP
Section 2(5) of the Act provides:
The term "labor organization" means any organization of any kind . . . in
which employees participate and which exists for the purpose, in whole or in
part, of dealing with employers concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages,
rates of pay, hours of employment, or conditions of work.
MMP concededly is an organization which exists for the purpose, in part, of deal-
ing with employers concerning the subject matters enumerated in Section 2(5) of the
Act. Is it also an organization in which employees participate?
MMP's constitution (article II, section 1(a) and (b), and article XXV) permits
the acceptance into membership of nonofficer personnel. Respondents concede that
the members of MMP's Local No. 3 (Associated Maritime Workers), for which
provision is made in MMP's constitution, are "employees" within the meaning of the
18National Maritime Union, AFL-CIO, et at . ( Standard Oil Company , an Indiana
Corporation ), 121 NLRB 208; Hitchman Coal and Coke Company v. B. Mitchell, individu-
ally, et at ., 245 U. S. 229, 249.
132 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Act. Membership in MMP is acquired by becoming a member of a local. In addi-
tion, MMP has previously conceded that it is a labor organization within the meaning
of the Act.19
Moreover, the services of the Board have been invoked for the purpose of repre-
senting nonsupervisory employees. For example, in 1953, MMP "Apprentice
Local #3" filed a representation petition in Maritime Transit Company (Case No.
13-RC-3733, unpublished) for a unit of "deckhands, oilers, cooks, maids, watchmen,
excluding master-pilots, pilots, mates, chief engineers and assistant engineers, pro-
fessional employees, supervisors and guards as defined in the Act." The Local
won the ensuing election and was certified. In 1952 a petition was filed by "National
Organization Masters, Mates & Pilots of America, Apprentice Local #3, National
Organization Masters, Mates & Pilots of America, AFL" for a unit of "dockhands
oilers, cooks, cabin boys, mates, excluding masters, pilots and engineers." Sinclair
Refining Company (Case No. 14-RC-1912, unpublished). This election was also
won by Local #3, which was then certified as bargaining representatives for these
employees. And in 1954 MMP filed a petition in the capacity of a "labor organiza-
tion" seeking to represent nonsupervisory employees in a unit of "all boat operators
but excluding retail clerks, meat cutters, office clerical, guards, professional and
supervisory employees." This petition resulted in a consent-election agreement.
Economy Boat Stores (Case No. 14-RC-2549, unpublished) 20
From the foregoing, I conclude and find that MMP is an organization in which
individuals who are employees within the meaning of the Act participate. Based
on the same evidence, hereinabove set forth, the Board found in August 1958, that
MMP is a labor organization within the meaning of the Act. Standard Oil Com-
pany, 121 NLRB 208. Respondents argue that the Standard Oil Company decision
is distinguishable because the dispute in that case involved individuals who ad-
mittedly were "employees," whereas the dispute in the instant case involves pilots
who, Respondents contend, are not "employees." Respondents thus contend that
MMP may be a labor organization in one case but not in another. However, the
Board's decision does not rest on the narrow ground urged by Respondents. More-
over, the status of the individuals involved in an organization's dispute is not one
of the requirements set forth in the statutory definition of a labor organization. The
requirement is merely that it be an organization in which "employees" participate.
I find that MMP has met the requirements set forth in the statutory definition and
that, in line with the Standard Oil Company decision, supra, MMP is a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act 21
2. As to Local 47
Although I have found that Local 47 is liable for the proscribed conduct at
Cleveland, Ohio, as an agent of a labor organization (MMP), I find it unnecessary to
determine whether Local 47 is also a labor organization because the Board lacks
jurisdiction to make any unfair labor practice findings against Local 47 as a Re-
spondent or to direct an order against Local 47 as a Respondent, for the following
reasons:
The only conduct which I have found to be proscribed by Section 8(b) (4) (A) of
the Act is that which occurred at the premises of Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore in
Cleveland, Ohio. The allegations of the amended consolidated complaint relating
to this conduct are based on the charge filed in Case No. 13-CC-180, which was
Case No. 8-CC-76 before its consolidation. This was a joint charge filed on May 2,
1958, with the Regional Director for the Eighth Region in Cleveland, Ohio, by
Cleveland Stevedore, Lederer, National Terminal, and the Federation. Only MMP
and Johnson, but not Local 47, are named as Respondents in this charge. Conse-
19 J W. Banta Towing Company, Inc., at at ., 116 NLRB 1787. In holding that the
district court did not err in determining that there was reasonable cause to believe that
MMP was a labor organization in the 10 (1) injunction proceeding collateral hereto, the
Court of Appeals for- the Seventh Circuit deemed it significant that MMP "conceded in
other cases and pleadings that they are a labor organization ." Madden v . International
Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots of America , Inc., AFL-CIO, 259 F. 2d 312,
cert . denied 358 U.S. 909.
20I do not credit the testimony of E. A . Adams, who admitted signing the petition and
the consent-election agreement , that he was acting on behalf of Apprentice Local No. 3
and that the Local's name was omitted from these documents through an oversight.
21 In The Wilson Transit Company, et at., 80 NLRB 1476, 1477, 1480, the Board also
found MMP to be a "labor organization" but dismissed the petition on the ground that
the individuals sought to be represented were supervisors within the meaning of the Act.
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 133
quently, the Board has no jurisdiction to add Local 47 in the complaint as a
Respondent with respect to this conduct, or to make unfair labor practice findings
or issue an order against it as such Respondent.22 And the mere consolidation, "for
the purpose of complaint and hearing" in order "to avoid unnecessary costs and
delay," of the Cleveland charge with the other charges filed with the Regional
Director for the Thirteenth Region in Chicago, Illinois, in Cases Nos. 13-CC-168,
13-CC-169, and 13-CC-170, cannot confer upon the Board a jurisdiction which it
did not otherwise have in this respect.
There remains for consideration the question of whether the allegations in ques-
tion may be maintained solely on the basis of the Chicago charges on the well-
settled principle that a complaint may enlarge upon a charge to include "allegations
of unfair labor practices uncovered during the investigation" of the duly filed
charges, which occurred within 6 months of the filing of such charges,23 or allega-
tions whose "discovery was a natural result of the investigation." 24 Three separate
charges were filed with the Chicago Regional Office on April 25 and 28, 1958, by
Chicago Calumet, P & V Atlas, and North Pier, respectively. The charges state
that employees of these named companies were unlawfully induced to refuse to work
at specific named locations in Chicago, Illinois, and Milwaukee, Wisconsin, all within
the territorial jurisdiction of the Chicago Regional Office. MMP and Local 47 are
named as Respondents in each charge. The procedure for the processing of charges
is set forth in the Board's Statements of Procedure-Part 101, published in the
Federal Register. Section 101.2 provides for the filing of the charge with the
Regional Director for the region in which the alleged violations have occurred or
are occurring. Section 101.4 contains the following provisions: The Regional
Director requests the persons filing the charge to submit evidence in its support, and
the person against whom the charge is filed to submit a written statement of his
position in respect to the allegations in the charge. The case is then assigned to a
member of the field staff for investigation, who interviews representatives of all
parties and those persons who have knowledge of the charges.
In view of all the foregoing, it is not reasonable to assume that the conduct which
occurred in Cleveland, Ohio, involving different companies at locations within the
territorial jurisdiction of another Regional Office (Eighth Region), would have been
"uncovered" by the staff of the Chicago Regional Office (Thirteenth Region) "during
the investigation" of the Chicago charges, or that its "discovery" would have been
"a natural result of the -investigation" of the Chicago charges. That such conduct
in fact was not uncovered in the course of the investigation of the Chicago charges,
is shown by .the fact that the original consolidated complaint, which issued on
May 23, 1958, before the General Counsel at Washington, D.C., issued an order
transferring the Cleveland charge to the Chicago Regional Office,25 was based solely
on the Chicago charges, and did not include the allegations concerning the conduct
at the premises of Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore in Cleveland, Ohio. The con-
clusion is inescapable that the latter allegations are based solely on the Cleveland
charge.
F. Concluding findings
I have found, as previously detailed, that the conduct which occurred at the
premises of Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore in Cleveland, Ohio, is proscribed by
Section 8(b)(4)(A) of the Act. I have also found that MMP is a labor organiza-
tion within the meaning of the Act and is liable for such conduct. I have further
found that Local 47 and Johnson acted as agents for MMP, within the meaning of
Sections 2(13) and 8(b) of the Act, and are therefore equally liable for such con-
duct as agents of a labor organization, but that the Board lacks jurisdiction to hold
Local 47 liable as a Respondent. Accordingly, I find that MMP and its agent,
Johnson, violated Section 8(b) (4) (A) of the Act by inducing and encouraging
22 Seampru/e, Incorporated, 82 NLRB 892, 894, 900-901 ; N.L.R.B. v. Hopwood Re-
tinning Co., 98 F. 2d 97, 101-102 (C.A. 2).
23 Cathey Lumber Company, 86 NLRB 157, 159-162; Morristown Knitting Mills, 80
NLRB 731, 732.
24 N.L.R.B. v. Kohler Company, 220 F. 2d 3, 7 (C.A. 7) ; Charles Ostrowski, et at.,
d/b/a Philadelphia Woodwork Company, 121 NLRB 1642.
25 On June 23, 1958, a month after the issuance of the original consolidated complaint,
General Counsel Fenton issued an order transferring Case No. 8-CC-76 from the Eighth
Region to the Thirteenth Region and continuing said case in the Thirteenth Region as
Case No. 13-CC-180, "in order to effectuate the purposes of the National Labor Relations
Act, and to avoid unnecessary costs or delay."
535828-60-vol. 125-10
134 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
employees of employers 26 doing business with Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore to
engage in concerted refusals in the course of their employment to handle com-
modities or to perform services for their respective employers , with an object of
(1) forcing or requiring such employers to cease doing business with Lederer and
Cleveland Stevedore , and (2 ) forcing or requiring Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore
to cease doing business with foreign shipowners.27
IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE
The activities of the Respondents set forth in section III, above , occurring in con-
nection with the operations of the Employers set forth 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 commerce and the free
flow of commerce.
V. THE REMEDY
Having found that the Respondents , MMP and Johnson, have engaged in activities
violative of Section 8(b)(4)(A ) of the Act , I will recommend that they cease and
desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action designed to effectuate the policies
of the Act. Local 47 will of course be enjoined by such an order to the extent that
it may act as an agent of MMP.
I will also recommend that Respondents post copies of the notice, attached hereto
as Appendix A, at its business office at Cleveland , Ohio, and that signed copies of
such notice be furnished by the Regional Director for posting , the Employers willing,
at the premises of Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore and at the Ohio premises of
the other employers affected by Respondents ' unfair labor practices ( see footnote 27,
supra).
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 Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots of America, Inc.,
AFL-CIO, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. Rolla R. Johnson and Great Lakes District , Local No. 47, International Organi-
zation of Masters , Mates and Pilots of America , Inc., AFL-CIO, are agents of the
above-named labor organization , within the meaning of Sections 2(13) and 8(b) of
the Act.
3. The above -named labor organization and Rolla R. Johnson have engaged in
unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (b)(4)(A) of the Act by in-
ducing and encouraging employees of employers doing business with Lederer
Terminal Warehouse Company and Cleveland Stevedore Company to engage in con-
certed refusals in the course of their employment to handle commodities or to per-
form services for their respective employers, with an object of ( 1) forcing or re-
quiring such employers to cease doing business with Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore,
and (2 ) forcing or requiring Lederer and Cleveland Stevedore to cease doing business
with foreign shipowners.
4. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting com-
merce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
5. Unfair labor practices have not been committed by any Respondents at Chicago,
Illinois, and Milwaukee , Wisconsin , and by Local 47 at Cleveland, Ohio.
[Recommendations omitted from publication.]
2Q These include Valley Freight Lines , Lake Erie Freight Lines , Cleveland Buffalo
Freight Lines , Saunders Cartage Freight Lines , Greeley Warehouse , Federal Express, Inc.,
Shoemauker Company, Baltimore-Pittsburgh Freight Company, American Rubber Company,
S. J. Kiebler Brothers , Warner and Smith Truck Transport , Brewer Trucking Company,
and Norwalk Truck Lines, Inc.
271 find without merit Respondents ' contention that the Act does not apply to the
conduct in question because the primary dispute involves " the economy of foreign vessels"
while navigating the Great Lakes . Regardless of whether the Board has or has not
jurisdiction over the foreign shipowners , as such , the Board clearly does have jurisdiction
over unfair labor practices occurring in this country affecting commerce . Washington-
Oregon Shingle Weavers' District Council, et al. (Sound Shingle Co.), 101 NLRB 1159;
Moore Dry Dock case , supra.
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 135
APPENDIX A
NOTICE TO ALL MEMBERS OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES
AND PILOTS OF AMERICA, INC., AFL-CIO, AND OF GREAT LAKES DISTRICT,
LOCAL No. 47
Pursuant to the recommendations of a Trial Examiner of the National Labor
Relations Board, and in order to effectuate the policies of the Labor Management
Relations Act, we hereby notify you that:
WE WILL NOT induce or encourage employees of employers (other than
foreign shipowners) doing business with Lederer Terminal Warehouse Company
and Cleveland Stevedore Company to engage in a strike or concerted refusal
in the course of their employment to use, manufacture, process, transport, or
otherwise handle or work on goods, articles, materials, or commodities, or to
perform any services for their respective employers, where an object thereof
is (1) to force or require such employers to cease doing business with Lederer
Terminal Warehouse Company and Cleveland Stevedore Company, or (2) to
force or require Lederer Terminal Warehouse Company and Cleveland Steve-
dore Company to cease doing business with foreign shipowners.
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES
AND PILOTS OF AMERICA, INC., AFL-CIO,
Labor Organization.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(Representative) Title)
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
ROLLA R. JOHNSON, Vice President
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof, and must not be
altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
APPENDIX B
RELEVANT PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN CONSTITUTION OF INTERNATIONAL, MMP
Article 11
Section 1: (a) This Organization shall be composed of personnel acting in an
officer capacity aboard sail or power-propelled vessels on ocean, coastwise, Great
Lakes and inland waters, who have been regularly admitted to membership and are
in good standing.
(b) Local subordinate associations may limit the membership thereof to type of
jurisdiction such as ocean, coastwise, Great Lakes and inland waters, according to the
desires of the membership.
(c) The Locals of the international organization shall be segregated into nine dis-
tricts. Each District shall embrace the following jurisdiction. .
(d) Each District shall be under the supervision of one or two International Vice
Presidents, excepting the Associated Maritime Workers District which shall be under
the supervision of the Associated Maritime Workers Vice President.
Article III
Section 1: (a) Every Subordinate Local shall hereafter be known by the follow-
ing title:
INTERNATION ORGANIZATION OF
MASTERS, MATES AND PILOTS
Local No. --------
Section 4 : The Local shall arrange for , and have all their officers who are en-
trusted with the finances of such Local bonded, and the International Secretary-
Treasurer informed of the names of such officers so bonded , and by what company.
Article IV
Section 1 : ( a) A person desiring membership in the Organization shall make
application on the form prescribed and supplied by the International office.
(b) To be admitted to membership , a person with the qualifications as stated in
Article II, Section 1, shall fill out an official blank, deposit the initiation fee, three
months dues and current assessments , if any, with the Local with which the applicant
desires membership . The application shall be submitted to the membership at a
136 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
regular meeting for acceptance or rejection subject to the Local's By-laws, Rules and
Regulations. If rejected, all money deposited by the applicant shall be refunded
to such applicant.
Article VII
Section 1: Any member who violates his obligations and the rules or regula-
tions adopted by the Organization or Local, and/or acts in a manner unbecoming a
member of organized labor . . . , shall be summoned before the membership of his
Local for trial and be dealt with according to the findings of such trial.
Article VIII
Section 1: The authority and power of this Organization is vested in the mem-
bers thereof acting by and through their duly elected or appointed officers and
delegates meeting in Convention assembled.
Section 2: Such Convention is the source of all and legitimate authority over
the Organization and possesses as much supreme and absolute power over same and
all channels leading thereto, .
Section 3: The International Executive Committee, as hereinafter constituted,
shall when the Convention is not in session have and be clothed with all power of
the Organization in Convention assembled.
Article X
Section 1: (b) The initiation fee in all Locals shall be not less than $200.00 for
any applicant. The initiation fee for any applicant who has served more than a year
on his license, issued by the United States authorities, shall be not less than $500.00
except where the Organization has no contract and where for organizing purposes
the International President may after investigation, give dispensation to a Local and
waive all or part of the initiation fee.
Section 2: [Prescribes the minimum dues for offshore, coastwise and inland mem-
bers.] Dues to be payable quarterly, semi-annually or annually in advance, except a
Local that collects dues on a percentage basis. Should any Local or Locals desire
to have a sick or death benefit, a separate fund must be created and maintained for
that purpose.
Article XI
Section 6: The International Executive Committee shall have power between
Conventions, by a majority affirmative vote of the International Executive Com-
mittee, to recommend the calling of a strike in a dispute over which the International
Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, Inc., has jurisdiction. Such recom-
mendation by the International Executive Committee shall by express resolution,
give the reasons for the strike and the issues involved. No such strike shall be called
until all members ashore or afloat and in port shall by referendum ballot by a
majority, vote in favor of a strike. In no case shall a referendum ballot take longer
than a period of thirty (30) days. When a strike is called subject to the above
conditions it shall not be called off except by a majority affirmative vote of all the
members ashore and aboard ship in port or ports.
Article XIII
Section 8: (a) Upon the recommendation of the majority of the International
Executive Committee, the President or any person or persons whom he may desig-
nate shall have the right to make such investigation of the books and affairs of any
Local as he may desire and all officials of Locals shall render all required assistance
to facilitate such examination.
(b) If the International President receives information from the investigation
conducted in accordance with this Section, which leads him to believe that the
officers of a Local are dishonest or incompetent, or that the Local is not being con-
ducted for the benefit of the trade, he may appoint a trustee with the consent of the
International Executive Committee to take charge and control of the affairs of the
Local.
Article XVIII
Section 4: Any Local violating any of the laws, rules or regulations laid down
for its government, or disobeying any lawful order of the International President or
International Executive Committee, may be suspended or dissolved and its charter,
funds and property taken charge of by the International Executive Committee and
be held in trust for the Local by the International Organization. The International
INT'L ORGANIZATION OF MASTERS, MATES & PILOTS, ETC. 137
Executive Committee shall have full power to take such other action as it deems
advisable.
Article XIX
Section 2: Locals shall have authority to negotiate agreements affecting their
locality and jurisdiction exclusively. The agreement must be made in the name of
the International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots, Inc. No agreement
shall be signed by a Local Officer without receiving the consent of the International
President or International Vice-President of the District and the majority of the
members involved, except the Master contract of the District already in effect may
be signed without submitting it for approval. Original copies of all agreements are
to be forwarded to the International Headquarters, copies to be made and retained
by Locals or Local in the district which embraces the agreements.
Article XXIII
Section 1: Any Local may alter or amend its By-laws in the manner specified
therein and approved by a two-thirds majority affirmative vote of the membership
voting on a referendum ballot. Such alterations or amendments shall not become
effective until approved in writing by the International President and attested by
the International Secretary-Treasurer under the seal of the International Organization.
Section 2: Any Article in the By-laws of any Local conflicting with this Con-
stitution is hereby repealed and no Local shall alter or amend any part of this
Constitution.
Section 3: Locals may adopt By-laws, Rules and Regulations for their govern-
ment, subject to the approval of the International President and International
Secretary-Treasurer. Provided always however, that no By-law, Rules and Regula-
tions shall be approved which are in contravention to any provision of this
Constitution.
Article XXV Creating . . . Associated Maritime Workers' Locals
Section 1: Eligibility to membership shall be any person employed in the Mari-
time industry not working under the authority of a license.
Section 4: Regular and Associated Maritime Workers' Locals may call joint
special meetings for transaction of business affecting both Locals.
APPENDIX C
RELEVANT PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN CONSTITUTION AND BYLAWS OF LOCAL 47
Article IV
Section 1: Transfers to other locals shall be issued in accordance with the provi-
sions as stipulated in the Constitution of the International Organization of Masters,
Mates and Pilots.
Article VII
Sections 1 and 2: (make provisions for the nomination and election of delegates
to the "convention of the International Organization of Masters, Mates and
Pilots").
Article XIV
Section 7: Any member convicted in the regular manner of an offense against
the local may appeal to the Executive Board or convention of the International
Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots.
Article XVI
Section 2: The initiation fee shall not be less than provided for in the Inter-
national Constitution of Masters, Mates and Pilots and shall accordingly accompany
application for membership . . . .
Section 3: All members in arrears shall be governed by the International Con-
stitution, International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots.
Article XIX
Section 1: The organization may declare a strike in accordance with the
following requirements: .
Section 2: Such strike shall receive the endorsement of the International Execu-
tive Committee of the International Organization of Masters, Mates and Pilots.