Todd Shipyards Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Sep 1, 1943

52 N.L.R.B. 356 (N.L.R.B. 1943)

In the Matter of TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATION (HOBOKEN DIVISION)
and INDUSTRIAL UNION OF MARINE AND SHIPBUILDING WORKERS OF
AMERICA, LOCAL #15, C. I. O.
Case No. B-5667.-Decided September 1, 1943
Cullen & Dykman, by Messrs. Harry G. Hill and Robert B. Lisle, of
Hoboken, N. J., for the Company.
Mr. Samuel L. Rothbard, by Mr. Clarence Talisman, of Newark,
N. J., for the Union.
Mr. Robert Silagi, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon amended petitions duly filed by Industrial Union of Marine
and Shipbuilding Workers of America, Local #15, C. I. 0., herein
called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had
arisen concerning the representation of employees of Todd Shipyards
Corporation (Hoboken Division), Hoboken, New Jersey, herein called
the Company,' the National Labor Relations Board consolidated the
petition herein with another petition filed by the Union covering other
employees of the Company,2 and provided for an appropriate hearing
upon due notice before Daniel Baker, Trial Examiner. Said hearing
was held at Hoboken, New Jersey, on, July 12, 1943. The Company
and the Union appeared and participated. All parties were afforded
full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses,
and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues.
For the purpose of decision the instant case was severed from Case
No. R-5668 by order of the Board, dated August 11, 1943. At the
hearing the Company moved to dismiss the petition herein on the
ground that the employees petitioned for are a part of management.
For the reasons set forth in Section IV, infra, the motion is hereby
denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were af-
forded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
1 At the hearing the petitions were amended to show the Company's true designation.
2 Case No. R-5668.
52 N. L. R. B., No. 50.
356
TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATON 357
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Todd Shipyards Corporation is engaged principally in the repair,
alteration, and conversion of seagoing vessels. The Company operates
several shipyards; however, it is solely with the one at Hoboken, New
Jersey, that this proceeding is concerned. The ship repair work per-
formed by the Hoboken Division exceeds $10,000,000 per annum, 90
percent of which is billed against vessels engaged in interstate com-
merce and an equal percent of the total work is performed under con-
tracts with agencies of the United States Government. A substantial
majority of the material that is used by the Company is shipped to
the Hoboken Division from points outside the State of New Jersey
and the Company's products are installed in ships which operate in
interstate and international commerce.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of America,
Local #15, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations,
is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the
Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
Prior to and in the course of the hearing the Company refused to
grant recognition to the Union as the exclusive bargaining representa-
tive of the employees here petitioned for until the Union has been cer-
tified by the Board in an appropriate unit. A statement of the Re-
gional Director, introduced in evidence at the hearing, indicates that
the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the unit
hereinafter found appropriate.'
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.,
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union seeks a unit composed exclusively of guards employed
at the Hoboken shipyards. The Company takes the position that
' The Regional Director reported that the Union submitted '95 application -for-membership
cards, 88 of which bore the names of persons appearing on the Company 's pay roll of
June 6, 1943 , which contains the names of 148 employees in the appropriate unit. Of
these 88 cards , 72 bore apparently genuine original signatures , and 16 bore printed names.
The cards were dated between April and June 1943.
358 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
guards, under the theory of The Maryland Drydock Company 4 deci-
sion, are part of management and should not be permitted collective
bargaining representation under the Act. In this contention the
Company is clearly mistaken.5 We have often held, as we do now, that
plant-protection employees are entitled to the full benefits of the Act
despite their militarization. The only limitation thereon was set forth
in the very recent Dravo case,e where we said :
The militarization of plant-protection employees, while no ob-
stacle to unionization, is nevertheless significant. As civilian
auxiliaries of a military force, the guards have greater duties
and obligations than have those plant-protection employees who
are not militarized. To the end that the guards may be better
able to function within the military sphere, and to permit the mili-
tary authorities to exercise greater control over the guards, we
shall establish a bargaining unit for all militarized plant-pro-
tection employees separate and apart from those who are non-
militarized. We contemplate that the separation of the bargain-
ing units in their negotiations with the Company and their day
to day activities will be one of fact, not merely form.
In the instant case, the guards petitioned for are employees of the
Company. With the exception of those stationed at the gates of the
shipyard, and the supervisory guard personnel, they are not armed.
Although they are all temporary members of the Coast Guard Reserve,
they wear no uniforms except that some wear Coast Guard caps and
others wear coats which have the appearance of uniform coats. The
guards work under the supervision of the sergeants and ultimately a
captain who is responsible to the plant management, and also to the
chief commanding guard -officer who is in charge of all of the Com-
pany's shipyards. The duties of the guards are mainly to protect the
property of the Company from theft and sabotage. They also report
violations of the Company's rules to their superiors who, in turn,
make reports to the management. They do not attempt to discipline
the production workers or to enforce the rules and regulations of the-
Company other than through the reporting of violations. It is also
their duty to exclude from the shipyard premises persons not author-
ized to be thereon.
From all the evidence it is manifest that the guards exercise moni-
tory and not supervisory functions. We shall therefore establish a
separate unit for the guards. We find that all guards employed in the
Hoboken Division of the Company, but excluding sergeants, lieuten-
ants, captains, and all other supervisory employees with authority to
hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the
* 49 N. L R B. 733.
See Matter of The Maryland Drydock Company, 50 N L R B 363
e See Matter of Dravo Corporation., 52 N. L R. B 322.
TODD SHIPYARDS CORPO,RATON 359
status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Union requested that June 6, 1943, be used as the date of
eligibility to vote. No special reason appearing for deviating from
our normal practice, we shall direct that the question concerning
representation which has arisen,be resolved by an election by secret
ballot among the employees in the appropriate unit who were em-
ployed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of
the Direction of Election herein, subject to the limitations and addi-
tions set forth in the Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the national
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended; it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain represent-
atives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Todd Shipyards
Corporation (Hoboken Division), Hoboken, New Jersey, an election
by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later
than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the di-
rection and supervision of the Regional Director for the Second
Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela-
tions Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said
Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the unit found ap-
propriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including
employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because
they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, and including
employees in the armed forces of the United States who present
themselves in person at the polls, but excluding those employees who
have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether
or not they desire to be represented by Industrial Union of Marine
and Shipbuilding Workers of America, Local #15, C. I. 0., for the
purposes of collective bargaining.
CHAIRMAN MILLIS took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.