Shipowners' Association of The Pacific Coast

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 21, 1938

7 N.L.R.B. 1002 (N.L.R.B. 1938)

In the Matter of SHIPOWNERS' ASSOCIATION OF THE PACIFIC COAST,
WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF THE PACIFIC COAST, THE
WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS OF SEATTLE, THFJ WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS
OF PORTLAND, THE WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF SAN
FRANCISCO, THE WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA, and INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S AND WAREHOUSE-
MEN'S UNION, DISTRICT No. 1
In the Matter Of WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA and INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S AND WAREHOUSE-
MEN'S UNION, LOCAL 1-13
Cases Nos. B-638 and R-572, respectively.Decided June 21, 1938
Longshoremen Industry-D+mployer: companies functioning through associa-
tions-Investigation of Representatives: controversy concerning representation
of employees : controversy concerning appropriate unit ; employer's refusal to
grant recognition of union ; necessity for designation of proper collective bar-
gaining agency to facilitate negotiations for next contract-period-Contract-
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : workers who do the longshore
work in the Pacific Coast ports of the United States for the companies which
are members of the employer associations herein involved ; coast-wide ; "em-
ployer" unit : meaning of ; history of employer organization : organization of
companies on coast basis , functioning of companies with respect to labor rela-
tions ; history of collective bargaining relations with employer and in industry :
failure - of bargaining attempted on a local scale, successful bargaining on coast
basis , present coast-wide agreement ; desires of employees : visiting privileges,
absorption of unemployed members ; basic similarity of working rules ; walking
bosses excluded ; differences in meaning of subclassifications of longshoremen
in various ports-Representatives : proof of choice : comparison of employee
lists and union cards-Certification of Representatives: upon proof of majority
representation.
Mr. Bertram Edises, for the Board.
Gladstein, Grossman & Margolis, by Mr. Richard Gladstein and
Mr. Aubrey Grossman, of San Francisco, Calif., for I. L. W. U.,
I. L. W. U. District No. 1, and I. L. W. U. Local 1-13.
Mr. Carey McWilliams, of Los Angeles, Calif., for I. L. W. U.
Local 1-13.
Mr. Charles J. Katz, Mr. John C. Packard, of Los Angeles, Calif.,
and Mr. W. J. Hull, of Long Beach, Calif., for I. L. A. Local 38-82,
Inc.,-
1 Katz and Packard were permitted to represent those interests in I. L. A. Local 38--82,
Inc., which they represented in the proceedings in the Superior Court of the State of Cali-
fornia, in and for the County of Los Angeles, entitled Walker V. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local 38-82, Inc., Number 420356. Hull was permitted to represent the
adverse interests in I. L. A. Local 38-82, Inc.
1002
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1003
Mr. Gregory Harrison, of San Francisco, Calif., for Shipowners'
Association of the Pacific Coast, and members thereof listed in Ap-
pendix "B"; Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast,
and members thereof listed in Appendix "C"; Waterfront Employers
of Seattle, and members thereof listed in Appendix "D"; Waterfront
Employers of Portland, and members thereof listed in Appendix
"E"; Waterfront Employers 'Association of San Francisco, and mem-
bers thereof listed in Appendix "F"; and Waterfront Employers
Association of Southern California, and members thereof listed in
Appendix "G".
• Mr. A. H. Petersen, of Gardena, Calif., for the A. F. of L.
Mr. James F. Kennedy and Mr. Lawrence Mallen, of San Francisco,
Calif., for I. L. A. Local 38-79. .
Mr. Milton D. Sapiro, of San Francisco, Calif., for I. L. A. Local
38-79.
Mr. L. B. Sulqrove, of Tacoma, Wash., for I. L. A., I. L. A. Local
38-97, I. L. A. Local 38-89, I. L. A. Local 38-86, and I. L. A. Local
38-83.
Mr. Samuel DeG'root, of Los Angeles, Calif., for I. L. A. Local
38-82, Inc.
Mr. Joseph L. Searles, of San Francisco, Calif., for I. L. A. Local
38-79.
Mr. Martin Kurasch, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
4
On January 29, 1938, after a hearing, the National Labor Relations
Board, herein called the Board, issued a Decision and Order in a
proceeding it had entitled Case No. XXI-8-325,2 in which it re-
manded the proceedings for purposes of further hearing.3 That pro-
ceeding had been based upon a petition filed by International Long-
shoremen's and Warehousemen's Union ,4 Local 1-13 alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation
of longshoremen of Waterfront Employers Association of Southern
California in Los Angeles and Long Beach harbor and requesting
an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Sec-
2 Upon being transferred to the Board the designation of the case was changed to Case
No. R-572
8 4 N. L. It, B. 1199. That Decision contains a detailed statement of the pleadings and
proceedings prior thereto .
4 International Longshoremen 's and warehousemen ' s Union is herein called I L W.'U
1004 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tion 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein
called the Act.
On January 10, 1938, I. L. W. U. Local 1-46 filed with the Regional
Director for the Twenty-first Region (Los Angeles, California) a.
petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen con-
cerning the representation of longshoremen employed by Waterfront
Employers Association of Southern California in the Santa Barbara
and Ventura harbor area and requesting an investigation and certifi-
cation of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act. This
proceeding was entitled Case No. XXI-R-421.
On January 19, 1938, 1.--L. W. U., District No. 1, filed with the
Regional Director for the Twentieth Region (San Francisco, Cali-
fornia) a petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had
arisen concerning the representation of workers employed at long-
shore work in all the Pacific Coast ports of the United States. This
proceeding was entitled Case No. XX-R-196.
On January 29, 1938, the Board issued, together with its Decision
and Order in Case No. XXI-R-325, an Order Transferring Proceed-
ings from the Twenty-first Region to the Twentieth Region, Consoli-
dating and Directing Investigation and Hearing, by which Cases
Nos. XXI-R-421 and XXI-R-325 were, in accordance with Article
II, Section 37 (c), of National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations-Series 1, as amended, herein called the Rules and Regu-
lations, transferred to and continued in the Twentieth Region. The
proceedings transferred, and Case No. XX-R-196, were, in accord-
ance with Article III, Section 10 (c) (2), of the Rules and Regula-
tions, consolidated for purposes of hearing, and the Regional Di-
rector for the Twentieth Region was, pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the
Act and Article III, Section 3, of the Rules and Regulations, ordered
to conduct an investigation and to provide for appropriate hearings
upon due notice.
On February 4, 1938, the Board permitted I. L. W. U. Local 1-46
to withdraw its petition and ordered, in accordance with Article II,
Section 37 (c), of the Rules and Regulations, Case No. XXI-R-421
to be severed from Cases Nos. XXI-R-325 and XX-R-196.
On February 5, 1938, the Regional Director issued a notice of
consolidated hearing, copies of which were served upon the parties."
Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held in San Francisco, Cali-
fornia, from February 15 through February 25, 1938, inclusive, and
on March 25 and 26, 1938; in Los Angeles, California, on March 7,
1938; in San Pedro, California, from March 7, 1938, through March
9, 1938, inclusive; in Seattle, Washington, from March 14 through
March 17, 1938, inclusive; and in Portland, Oregon, on March 18
5 A list of the parties served is contained in Appendix "A".
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1005
and 19, 1938, before Walter B. Wilbur, the Trial Examiner duly
designated by the Board. The Board, the Shipowners' Association
of the Pacific Coast, and members thereof named in appendix "B",
Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, and members
thereof listed in appendix "C", Waterfront Employers of Seattle,
and members thereof listed in Appendix "D", Waterfront Employers
of Portland, and members thereof listed in appendix "E", Waterfront
Employers Association of San Francisco, and members thereof listed
in appendix "F", and Waterfront Employers Association of Southern
California, and members thereof listed in appendix "G", I. L. W. U.,
I. L. W. U. District No. 1, I. L. W. U. Local 1-13, and International
Longshoremen's Association 6 Locals 38-97, 38-89, 38-86, and 38-79,
were represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. A. H.
Petersen appeared for the American Federation of Labor, herein
called the A. F. of L., James F. Kennedy and Lawrence Mallen ap-
peared for I. L. A. Local 38-79. Charles J. Katz and John C. Pack-
ard appeared for those interests in I. L. A. Local 38-82, Inc., which
were associated with the Committee for Industrial Organization,
herein called the C. I. 0., and W. J. Hull appeared for those inter-
ests in I. L. A. Local 38-82, Inc., associated with the A. F. of L.
Samuel DeGroot made a special appearance for I. L. A. Local 38-82,
Inc., for the purpose of contesting the jurisdiction of the Board.
Full opportunity to be heard, to examine' and cross-examine witnesses
and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all
parties. 0
The A. F. of L., I. L. A., and I. L. A. Locals objected to the juris-
diction of the Board on the grounds that the existence of a contract
between the employers and I. L. A. Pacific Coast District 38 deprived
the Board of jurisdiction and that the Board had no power to desig-
nate a unit as one appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain-
ing, which was larger than the individual employer. The Trial
Examiner overruled these objections to the jurisdiction of the
Board. The I. L. W. U., I. L. W. U. District No. 1, and the
I. L. W. U. Locals sought to introduce testimony as to the structure
and formation of the Maritime Federation of the Pacific. Objec-
tions to the introduction of this evidence were sustained by the
Trial Examiner. During the course of the hearing the Trial Ex-
aminer made several other rulings on motions and on objections to
the admission of evidence. The Board has reviewed the rulings of
the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were com-
mitted. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
International Longshoremen 's Association is herein called I. L. A.
1006 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On April 30, 1938, Gregory Harrison, counsel for the companies
and associations, filed a brief with the Board at Washington, D. C.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANIES
During the course of the hearing counsel for the Board read into
the record the following stipulation :
It is hereby stipulated between the National Labor Relations
Board and the parties represented here by Mr. Gregory Harri-
son as follows :
(1) That each individual company here involved, that is to
say, each company listed herein as belonging to either the
Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, the
Waterfront Employers of Seattle, the Waterfront Employers of
Portland, the Waterfront Employers Association of San Fran-
cisco, or the Waterfront Employers Association of Southern
California, is engaged in the transportation or handling of
waterborne cargo.
Two ; that the longshoremen on whose behalf the petition in
this case is filed, handle said waterborne cargo.
Three; that more than 50 per cent of said cargo, at the time
it is handled by said longshoremen, is in the course of trans-
portation between States in the United States, or between the
United States and foreign countries, or between the United
States and non-contiguous territories or possessions of the
United States.
The companies which are members of the Waterfront Employers
of Seattle, Waterfront Employers of Portland, Waterfront Em-
ployers Association of San Francisco, and Waterfront Employers
Association of Southern California, herein collectively called the
regional associations, are either firms engaged in the transportation
of cargo or passengers by water, stevedoring companies or, except
in the case of Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco,
terminal operators.'
The companies which are members of the Shipowners' Association
of the Pacific carry lumber from the Northwest ports and are en-
gaged in the transportation of cargo in interstate or foreign com-
merce. Three members of the Shipowners' Association, Charles H.
Higgins Company, Hobbs-Wall & Company, and Los Angeles and
'' In the list of members of waterfront Employers of Seattle , Board Exhibit No. 17, The
Jordan Company appears under the classification "weigher".
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1007
San Francisco Navigating Company, transport cargo only between
ports in the State of California, but the vessels of each of these three
companies go outside the 3-mile limit.
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union is a
labor organization affiliated with the Committee for Industrial
Organization, admitting to its membership all workers engaged in
longshore work. International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's
Union, District No. 1, has jurisdiction over the ports in Alaska, Brit-
ish Columbia, California, Oregon, Washington, and the Hawaiian
Islands; each of its Locals has jurisdiction over one or more ports.
International Longshoremen's Association is a labor organization
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to its
membership all workers engaged in longshore work. Pacific Coast
District International Longshoremen's Association, Local No. 38, has
jurisdiction over all the ports of the Pacific Coast north of the
Republic of Mexico, and including the territory of Hawaii; each of
its Locals has jurisdiction over one or more ports.
III. THE HISTORY OF BARGAINING
In 1909 the I. L. A. and several independent longshoremen's asso-
ciations with which it had been competing in various ports on the
Pacific Coast entered into an agreement providing for the establish-
ment of Pacific Coast District International Longshoremen's Asso-
ciation, Local No. 38, of which all the local longshoremen's unions
on the Pacific Coast became a part. The Pacific Coast District was
given autonomy with respect to labor relations. No working agree-
ment could be entered into by any of its component locals without
the approval of the District, and it was agreed that no Local was to
be chartered by the I. L. A. without the consent of the District.
Between 1909 and 1934 the I. L. A. Pacific Coast District was unable
to reach that state of organization which would have enabled it to act
effectively as a unit on the Coast. Several local agreements with
employers, made by the San Francisco Local and the Tacoma Local,
were the total result of collective bargaining efforts. Longshoremen's
strikes in San Francisco, in 1916 and 1919, were lost by the longshore-
men. After the 1919 strike, the longshoremen, with the exception
of the Tacoma Local, were unable to achieve any effective collective
bargaining until 1934.
In February 1934 the San Francisco Local, opposed to plans to sub-
mit demands of the longshoremen to arbitration, called a convention
of the I. L. A. Locals in the Pacific Coast District to take action
1008 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
against these arbitration plans. The convention formulated certain
demands and provided for the taking of a strike vote if the,demands
were not met by the employers. One of the principal points in the
proposals of the convention was that there was to be one coast-wide
agreement rather than separate port agreements. Harry Bridges,
now president of I. L. W. U. and of the I. L. W. U. District No. 1,
testified that the longshoremen felt that the loss of the strikes in
1916 and 1919 was due to the lack of proper coast coordination among
the longshoremen, which permitted the companies to play one port
against the other.
After the employers had refused to accede to their demands, the
longshoremen voted to strike on March 23, 1934. But on March 22
President Roosevelt appointed a Mediation Board and the- con-
templated strike did not take place. Hearings were held before the
Mediation Board, and on April 3 an agreement was entered into be-
tween the San Francisco local and the Waterfront Employers'
Union of San Francisco, an' organization of companies operating in
the San Francisco area, which provided for the recognition of the
I. L. A. as the representative of the men in the port and for the
negotiation of the wage differences. Negotiations on the wage ques-
tion, however, were fruitless. The longshoremen 'reiterated their
demand for a coast agreement, and on May 9, 1934, all the long-
shoremen on the Pacific Coast went out on strike. Within a week the
seamen, boilermakers, and machinists had joined in the strike. Later
the teamsters and licensed officers also struck.
On May 28 a proposal for settlement was made which provided
that the employers in each of the ports of San Francisco, Los An-
geles, Seattle, and Portland would recognize the I. L. A. as the
representative ' of the longshoremen in those ports. This proposal
was rejected by the longshoremen because it was not a coast-wide
agreement and because it did not provide a settlement for the other
maritime unions on strike. On June 16 another proposal, signed by
Joseph P. Ryan, president of I. L. A., and by one of the District
officials, was rejected by a referendum of the longshoremen because
it provided no settlement for the other maritime unions on strike.
After June 16 a Joint Strike Committee was set up to coordinate
the activities of the various maritime unions on strike and to replace
the loose form of cooperation that had existed prior to this time.
In the northwest ports a Northwest Joint Strike Committee was
formed.
On June 26, 1934, President Roosevelt appointed a board, known
as the National Longshoremen's Board, consisting of Archbishop
Hanna, O. K. Cushing, and E. F. McGrady, to mediate the strike.
This Board effectuated a settlement of the strike and the longshore-
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1009
men returned to work on July 31, 1934. The settlement provided
that the issues in dispute which involved the longshoremen were
to be submitted to arbitration and that, with respect to the other
crafts on strike, collective bargaining negotiations were to be en-
tered into if the maritime unions were found, after elections had been
held, to represent a majority of the employees.
The National Longshoremen's Board, acting as an arbitration
board, held hearings in various ports on the Coast. Melnikow and
Kagel, of the Pacific Coast Labor Bureau, represented the long-
shoremen, and the employers were represented by Phleger. On
October 12, 1934, an arbitration award, which constituted a series
of agreements between the longshoremen and the regional associa-
tions of employers, was made. The Award set basic wage rates
and hour provisions and provided for the establishment of jointly
operated hiring halls. It was to be binding one all parties until
September 30, 1935, and was to be automatically renewed from year
to year unless written notice of the desire of any of the parties to
terminate or modify the Award was given 40 days prior to its
expiration date.
The Award was renewed in 1935 by virtue of the automatic re-
newal clause. In 1936 both parties gave notice of a desire to modify
the terms of the Award. The longshoremen, in reopening negotia-
tions, were motivated not only by a desire to effect certain amend-
ments but also by the fact that they did not want to be so bound by
the contract as to prevent their acting jointly with the other mari-
time unions if the latter decided that they wanted to change any of
their working conditions. In September 1936 the. Coast Negotiating
Committee, consisting of representatives of the longshoremen and of
the maritime unions, was set up to conduct negotiations with the
maritime employers. This Coast Negotiating Committee, after fail-
ing to arrive at any understanding through collective bargaining ne-
gotiations, recommended to each union that a referendum be taken
to empower their representatives on the Coast Committee to take
strike action on October 28, 1936. On October 28 all the maritime
unions simultaneously went out on strike. The Coast Negotiating
Committee, during the period of the strike, was designated the Coast
Policy Committee. An agreement terminating the strike was
reached on February 4, 1937.
The agreement of February 4, 1937, nominally an amendment to
the Award of the National Longshoremen's Board, contains an iden-
tical automatic renewal clause except that a 60-day period was set
up within which to give notice of desire to terminate. The hiring of
all longshoremen was to be through a hall maintained jointly'by The
Pacific Coast District of the I. L. A., and the employers' associations.
1010 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
A Labor Relations Committee, composed of three representatives of
the Employers Association and three representatives of the long-
shoremen, was to be set up in each port. The Labor Relations Com-
mittee maintains and operates the hiring hall, is in charge of the
registration list of regular longshoremen from which the longshore-
men assigned to work must be chosen, makes additions to the regis-
tered list, investigates and adjudicates all grievances and disputes
relating to working agreements, decides all grievances relating to dis-
charges, and in case of discharge without sufficient cause, may order
payment for lost time or reinstatement with or without payment for
lost time. It determines the organization of gangs and method of
dispatching, and chooses the personnel of the hiring hall, with the
exception of the dispatcher, who, under the agreement, is to be
selected by the I. L. A. The agreement states that preference of em-
ployment is to be given to members of Pacific Coast District Inter-
national Longshoremen's Association whenever available.
The agreement of February 4 provided for further negotiations
with respect to rates on penalty cargo," the maximum loads on slings
which the longshoremen would have to handle, and safety provi-
sions. No agreement has been attained with respect to a safety code,
but an agreement as to penalty cargoes was reached on April 16,
1937, and an agreement as to maximum loads was reached on April
23, 1937. Several small locals rejected these agreements, but they
were bound by the majority vote. Bridges testified that the long-
shoremen in San Francisco accepted the maximum loads agreement,
which set standards of distinct benefits to longshoremen in ports
other than San Francisco, even though the loads provided for were
greater than the San Francisco longshoremen had had to handle
previously.
The provisions of the agreement of February 4, 1937, and of the
penalty cargoes and maximum loads agreements, are those in effect
at the present time. The contracts are more fully discussed in Sec-
tions IV-VII below.
IV. THE HISTORY OF I. L. W. U.
Early in 1937 many I. L. A. locals passed resolutions in favor of,
and pledges of support and sympathy for, the C. I. O. Prior to
the annual convention of the Pacific Coast District of the I. L. A.,
Bridges, a president of the District, and the other District officers,
circulated a report among the various locals which recommended
that the District support the C. I. 0., and that a referendum of the
8 Penalty cargo Is that cargo , which, because of the danger or discomfort or difficulty in
handling, entitles the longshoreman to greater pay.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1011
International organization on the question of supporting and affiliat-
ing with the C. L O. be held. It was intended that the report be
discussed in the locals, and that the delegates to the convention from
the various locals be 'instructed on this issue.
The District Convention, meeting in Seattle in May 1937, adopted
Bridges' report, and took the further action of recommending to its
locals that they refuse to pay any assessment to the International
which would be used to fight the C. I. O. and of deciding that a
referendum would be taken to see how far the District would go in
such refusal.9
The longshoremen believed that the A. F. of L. Executive Council,
in its meeting at Cincinnati in June 1937, had decided upon extra
assessments from its international unions for the purpose of fighting
the C. I. 0., and that Ryan had agreed that the I. L. A. would pay
this extra assessment. Communications were sent to Ryan asking if
he had taken the position that he was willing to pay the extra assess-
ment. The communications were not answered.
At this time the Maritime Federation, with which the Pacific Coast
District and other maritime unions were associated, held its con-
vention at Portland, Oregon. Since the convention in February
1935, the I. L. A. delegates to the Maritime Federation conventions
had been designated the I. L. A. caucus. On occasion, representa-
tives of the I. L. A. International had met with the caucus. The
I. L. A. caucus, after the failure of Ryan to reply to the communi-
cations sent him concerning the extra assessments, decided to adopt
the recommendation of the Maritime Federation Convention that
each of its member unions hold a coastwise referendum to determine
whether or not their members wished to become affiliated with the
C. I. 0., and, on June 14, blank ballots providing for a vote on
the question of affiliating with the C. I. 0. and the question of re-
turning the defense fund, which was not very large at the time,
were sent to the locals. The American Radio Telegraphists' Associa-
tion and the Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association, both members
of the Maritime Federation, had, at this time, already become affili-
ated with the C. I. O.
The results of the vote among the members of the Pacific Coast
District of the I. L. A. were 11,771 in favor of affiliating with the
9 The resolutions, under the heading "Unity of the Labor Movement and the C. I 0."
read "RESOLVED: In the event any assessment is levied by the AFL and any attempt is
made to collect from locals such assessment, the purpose of which is to carry on a fight
against any bona fide group, either nationally or locally, we request unions refuse to pay
such assessments and entire District organization back up any local who may be disci-
plined because of their stand, and be it still further
"RESOLVED • That our District officials and Executive Board stand instructed to take a
referendum ballot to determine to what extent we will go in our refusal "
1012 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
C. I. O. and 3,625 opposed to affiliation;b0 the longshoremen's vote
was 7,073 in favor of affiliating with the C. I. O. and 2,263 opposed.h1
On July 18, 1937,12 the District Executive Board 13 met at Seattle,
Washington. They approved the taking of the referendum by the
I. L. A. caucus and instructed the officers to apply to the C. I. O.
for a charter. They decided that they would operate with the same
officers and the same Executive Board, that the District and the
several locals would function as previously under their existing con-
stitutions, and that the Executive Board should revise the District
Constitution in so far as that was made necessary by the new affilia-
tion.
On July 18; 1937, the Executive Board authorized the officers to
apply for a C. I. O. charter, and Ryan was informed of this on
July 19.
On July 22, 1937, the following letter, together with a blank form
of application for an International Longshoremen's Association
charter, was received by the Pacific Coast District Locals :
To ALL PACIFIC COAST DISTRICT LOCALS, I. L. A.
DEAR SIRS AND BROTHERS : President Harry Bridges of the Pa-
cific Coast District has notified our International Association
that the Pacific Coast District membership is seceding from our
International Organization to join the group known as the
C. I. O.
Naturally, the majority rules, but the experience of the Pa-
cific Coast longshoremen in the past has been that by following
radical leadership they have had to leave it to the Atlantic Coast
District membership to set their wages, and with the exception
of the port of Tacoma (where they remained loyal to our Inter-
national Association) they have had nothing to say about their
condition.
We, therefore, feel that any ports that wish to remain loyal
to our International should do so, and that any group in any
port should be permitted to retain their affiliation with the I. L.
A. Charters will be issued to these minority groups in each
port who wish to make application for same, and those who wish
10 The Pacific Coast District of the I. L. A. contained classes of workers other than long-
shoremen It included warehousemen , checkers, scalers and miscellaneous employees such
as watchmen , gatemen, shipping clerks, etc.
11 This includes the vote of several small locals in Hawaii and in Alaska.
12 At this time the vote had not yet been completed In a letter dated July 16, 1937,
Meehan stated that the vote among the members of the Pacific Coast District was 11,441
in favor of C. I. O. affiliation and 3 , 349 opposed to such affiliation.
13 This was a "lame duck " Executive Board A new Executive Board had been regularly
voted for by the 1. L. A. membership but the votes had not yet been counted.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1013
to remain in a body can return their present serial charters and
direct charters will be issued.
We request that you give this serious consideration, as I under-
stand that the other marine organizations on the Pacific Coast
are not going to affiliate with the C. I. O.-The Teamsters are
remaining loyal to the American Federation of Labor and the
Longshoremen may again find themselves alienated from the rest
of the labor movement.
We guarantee the entire backing of the International Long-
shoremen's Association to the membership who wish to remain
loyal to us.
Fraternally yours,
(S) JOSEPH P. RYAN,
International President.
On July 30, 1937 , Almon E. Roth, president of Waterfront Em-
ployers Association of the Pacific Coast, sent a letter to Bridges,
addressed as president of International Longshoremen's Association,
Local No. 38 , in which it was stated that the Waterfront Employers
Association of the Pacific Coast would not give notice of modification
or termination of the February 4 agreement , which would be auto-
matically renewed at midnight, July 31, 1937.
On the same day, Bridges sent the following reply:
SAN FRANCISCO , CALIF., Juiy 30, 1937.
Mr. ALMON E. ROTH, President,
Waterfront Employers' Association of the Pacific Coast,
215 Market Street, San Francisco , California. ,
DEAR SIR : This will acknowledge receipt of your communica-
tion of July 30, 1937 , expressing intention of not giving notice
of modification or termination of existing agreements and thereby
automatically renewing them for another year.
We hereby advise you that it is not our intention to give
notice of modification or termination of existing agreements and
that therefore they will be automatically renewed for another
year.
We note the change of your designation to Waterfront Em-
ployers' Association of the Pacific Coast . Please be advised
that by action of our Executive Board in compliance with the
vote of our membership we have likewise changed our name to
International Longshoremen 's and Warehousemen 's Union.
Yours very truly,
(Sgd.) H. R. Bridges.
H. R. BRIDGES, President.
A C. I. O. charter was received on August 11, 1937. On September
10 and 11, the Executive Board met at San Francisco. They decided
1014 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
that the name "International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's
Union" would be adopted, that the body would become the "Execu-
tive Board of the International Longshoremen and Warehousemen's
Union", that they would dissociate themselves from District 38 of
the I. L. A. and the International, that the District would become
known as District No. 1, I. L. W. U., and that charters would be
issued to the various locals. They agreed to be bound by the deci-
sions of the last and previous I. L. A. conventions.
From August_ 24, 1937, on, all the locals of longshoremen with
the exception of four, applied for charters from the I. L. W. U.
District. The four exceptions were the Tacoma, Olympia, Port
Angeles, and Anacortes locals, all in the Puget Sound area. At the
present time, there are about 10,575 Pacific Coast longshoremen in
the locals that are a part of I. L. W. U. District No. 1, and about
904 longshoremen in the locals that have remained with the I. L. A.14
The Tacoma local, on September 7, 1937, set up a committee of six
to coordinate their efforts to stay in the I. L. A., and to maintain
themselves as the I. L. A. District. The committee called an "emer-
gency convention" at San Francisco on September 20 or 21, 1937, at
which time officers were chosen ; most of the old officers now were the
officers of the I. L. W. U. The emergency convention instructed
Calkins, who had been elected secretary-treasurer, to send a letter to
the employers letting them know that I. L. A. District No. 38 was
still in existence and asking them to do business with it. Such a
letter was sent, but an answer was never received.
The emergency convention also passed a motion to the effect that
they would operate under the International constitution. No men-
tion was made of the District constitution.
V. THE HISTORY OF TIIE EMPLOYER ASSOCIATIONS
Melnikow, of the Pacific Coast Labor Bureau, testifying as an
expert for I. L. W. U., and Thomas G. Plant, vice president of the
American-Hawaiian Steamship Company, both stated that basic
wages and hours of work for longshoremen on the Pacific Coast had
been uniform since 1922. Melnikow attributed this to close coopera-
tion between the employers of longshore labor on the Coast.
There have been associations of employers of longshore labor in
Seattle since 1908, in San Francisco since 1914, in Portland since
1921, and in San Pedro since 1923. In 1934, they were organized in
four regional associations, Waterfront Employers of Seattle, Water-
front Employers of Portland, Waterfront Employers' Union of San
Francisco, and Marine Service Bureau of Los Angeles. Only a very
14 There are approximately 23,324 workers in all the locals that constitute a part of
I. L W U. District No. 1, and 1 ,009 workers in locals that have remained in the Interna-
tional Longshoremen ' s Association.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1015
small percentage of those companies which use longshore labor are
not members of the various associations, and no large company is
not a member.
A committee consisting of representatives of the four associations
was formed during the 1934 strike, and carried on the negotiations
with the longshoremen which finally resulted in the October 12, 1934
Award of the National Longshoremen's Board. The Award was in
the form of one document that was stated to be "a series of agree-
ments between the International Longshoremen's Association, act-
ing on behalf of various Locals whose members perform longshore
labor," on the one hand, and each of the regional associations, sepa-
rately, on the other hand. _
Marine Service Bureau of Los Angeles subsequently became
Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California, and
Waterfront Employers' Union of San Francisco became Waterfront
Employers Association of San Francisco. Waterfront Employers
Association of Southern California includes the employers in the ports
of Los Angeles, San Pedro, San Diego, Santa Barbara, Ventura, and
other ports in that vicinity. Waterfront Employers Association of
San Francisco covers the San Francisco Bay region through the
northern part of California. Waterfront Employers of Portland
includes the Oregon and Columbia River ports, and Waterfront Em-
ployers of Seattle includes the ports of Washington, excluding the
ports on the Columbia River.
In May 1935 Francis P. Foisie was given the task of coordinating
the activities of the four regional associations and was entitled Coast
Coordinator. Foisie testified that it was the general understanding
among the members of the associations that as long as they remained
members they could not enter into individual agreements with long-
shore unions.
In the spring of 1936, representatives chosen by the regional asso-
ciations met at San Francisco. A committee appointed by this con-
ference recommended to the whole group :
1. That the Committee appointed by the Conference and sub-
sequently confirmed by the above-mentioned associations, be
continued as the Committee.
2. That the Committee be known as:
The Coast Committee for the Shipowners acting on behalf of
Waterfront Employers Association of Southern California,
Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco, Waterfront
Employers of Portland, Waterfront Employers of Seattle.
3. That the Committee be authorized to act exclusively in
behalf of the four Association's of Waterfront Employers in con-
nection with or by reason of the pending expiration of their con-
tracts with the Pacific Coast District of the International Long-
106791-38-vol vii-65
1016 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOA1BD
shoremen's Association, including the determination and execu-
tion of all matters relating to negotiation of new labor contracts,
or termination, or renewal, or modification of existing contracts,
and the settlement of any and all disputes that may arise in
connection therewith.
6. That the Committee shall work toward one basic settlement
of the matters relating to the four Associations of employers of
longshore labor.
The recommendations were adopted and ratified by the four asso-
ciations, and the Coast Committee, consisting of T. J. Plant, T. B.
Wilson, John Walsh, E. T. Ford, W. P. Bannister, Hugh Gallagher,
and Joseph J. Lunny, was set tip.
Shortly after it was formed, the Coast Committee gave notice to
the I. L. A. Pacific Coast District that they desired amendments to
the contract which would have renewed itself on September 30, 1936.
The Union gave a similar notice. The Coast Committee then took
charge-of negotiations with the longshoremen, and, after the 1936-
1937 strike, reached the agreement of February 4, 1937, which was an
agreement between Pacific Coast District, Local 38 of the Interna-
tional Longshoremen's Association, and the Coast Committee for the
shipowners, on behalf of the four associations. -
In June 1937 an association known as Waterfront Employers Asso-
ciation of the Pacific Coast was created. Almon E. Roth, president
of the Association, testified that the Coast Committee had felt that the
renewal and execution of new contracts would call for some central
agency which would assume the same function which had been per-
formed by the various port associations, and that the Coast Associa-
tion was formed for that purpose. Harrison, counsel for the Asso-
ciation, testified that it was an association of those engaged in the
shipping business created for the purpose of formulating labor pol-
icies up and down the Pacific Coast in connection with longshore
labor and other matters in which they were interested. He stated that
the prime emphasis was on labor policy.
Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast includes
in its membership voting members, which are firms "regularly en-
gaged in carrying cargo by water to and from any port on the
Pacific Coast of the United States (except Alaska ports) , or any
agent designated by such firm ...... and associate members,
which are firms "employing longshoremen or other shore employees
in any port on the Pacific Coast of the United States." Voting
power is restricted to the voting members.15
li V'oting power is distributed among the voting members in accordance with the tonnage
of cargo handled by such member in the preceding calendar year.
DECISIONS AN D ORDERS 1017
Officials of the Association stated that, although all of the ship-
ping companies, included in the first class of membership, require
longshore labor for their operations, few of them hire longshore
workers directly. 11 the necessary longshore work is, in the greater
number of instances, done by the stevedoring companies, which con-
stitute the associate-member class. It was the contention of counsel
for the employers that, because of this fact and because the regional
associations can act independently in matters involving longshore
labor, Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast is
not closely concerned with the negotiation of agreements concerning
longshore labor on the Pacific Coast or with the terms of employment
of longshore labor except in so far as it acts as a clearing house for
information for the regional associations.
It is clear, however, that both the shipping companies and Water-
front Employers Association of the Pacific Coast are intimately
associated with the employment of longshore labor and the negotia-
tion and execution of agreements concerning longshore labor.
The Coast Committee for the shipowners, which negotiated the
agreement of February 4, 1937, consisted of seven men, only one of
whom was a representative of a company that regularly employed
longshore labor. The list of members of the regional associations
which is attached to the February 4 agreement for the purpose of
indicating what companies were represented, contains the names of
the shipping companies, and section 1 of the agreement contains the
following paragraph :
It is agreed and understood that if the employers, parties to
this agreement shall sub-contract work as. defined herein, pro-
vision shall be made for the observance of this agreement.17
The Amended Articles of Incorporation of Waterfront Employers
Association of the Pacific Coast, in stating the purposes of the Asso-
ciation, refers generally to members without distinguishing between
voting and associate members:
ARTICLE II
The said corporation is one which does not contemplate pe-
cuniary gain or profit for its members and is formed for the
following purposes and objects:
1. To encourage the establishment and maintenance of fair and
reasonable wages and working conditions for longshore work
' The statement may be misleading , in that the record does not indicate the percentage
of the longshoi e work on the Pacific Coast , in terms of tonnage , that is performed by the
longshoremen hired directly by these companies
17 Section 3 of the Amended Articles of Incorporation , quoted below , also refers to con-
tracts between members of the Association and other employers in matters relating to the
emplo3ment of longshoremen.
1018 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and other work ashore relating to steamship service and, by
the establishment and maintenance of harmonious and peaceful
industrial relations between employer and employee, to promote
dependable and efficient steamship service in the public interest;
2. To fix, establish and maintain on behalf of its members
policies in all matters relating to longshore work and other em-
ployments ashore at Pacific Coast ports of the United States
(except Alaska ports) ;
3. To represent its members and others in matters relating to
the employment of longshoremen and other shore employees at
said ports including the negotiation, execution and performance
of contracts ii ith other employers or groups thereof and contracts
with groups or associations of longshoremen and other shore em-
ployees governing wages, hours and conditions of such employ-
ment ;
4. To assist, represent and act in behalf of the members and
others in connection with any violations of agreements relating
to longshore or other employments ashore at said ports, to the
end that all such agreements shall'be faithfully performed by
all parties thereto;
The bylaws provide that the regional associations shall each be
entitled to designate two representatives, one to be selected for
knowledge of stevedoring, the other for knowledge of terminal or
dock operation. These representatives are to attend meetings of the
Board of Directors of the Coast Association, although they do not
have any voting power. The bylaws provide that members are bound
by contracts entered into by the Coast Association unless they resign
within 7 days after the vote on the contract.18 The bylaws also
provide that:
ARTICLE XVIII
SECTION I. This corporation shall have power to establish pol-
icies for its members and the corporation in all matters relating
to labor contracts and labor controversies and shall have power
to represent and act on behalf of its members in any negotiations
carried on by the corporation on behalf of its members with
unions of longshoremen or other employments ashore and, sub-
ject to the provisions of Article V of these by-laws, any contracts,
commitments or undertakings made by this corporation on be-
half of its members with any union shall bind the members of
this corporation. . . .
18 BY _Laws-Article V.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1019
SEC. 2. If any union, its members or officials, shall violate any
labor contract or award relating to wages, hours or working
conditions to which agreement or award this corporation or
any of its members is a party, whether by strikes, stoppages of
work or in any other manner, any member affected thereby shall
notify the corporation. . . . If compliance is not secured, a
meeting of the members of this corporation shall forthwith be
called and all members of this corporation shall take whatever
action shall be determined by a vote of members holding at
least a majority of the voting power of the membership, pro-
vided that there shall be no suspension or termination of any
such contract or agreement for breach thereof without the con-
sent of members representing at least two-thirds of the voting
power of the entire membership. Provided further that written
notice of any such vote or consent shall be immediately given
by registered mail to all members and no such vote or consent shall
bind any member who did not join therein and who resigns
within seven days after the date of mailing of such notice.ia
In July 1937 the following resolution was adopted by the four
regional associations :
Be it hereby resolved, that the Waterfront Employers Associa-
tion of the Pacific Coast, a nonprofit corporation, be, and the
same is, hereby authorized on behalf of this association, and
as its act and deed, to act in all matters relating to the expira-
tion of pending contracts between this association and the Inter-
national Longshoremen's Association or any Local thereof, in-
clud:n g the determination and execution of all matters relating
to the negotiation of new labor contracts or termination or
renewal or modification of existing contracts and the settlement
of any and all disputes that may arise in connection therewith.20
It should be noted that this language closely parallels the language
in the recommendations which led to the setting up of the Coast
Committee.
11 With regard to cooperation in strikes , the bylaws provide that :
If any labor union or association of working men or any members of any such union
or association shall violate any agreement with this corporation , or with any mem-
ber thereof , or shall refuse to work for any member or members of this corporation,
the Board of Directors shall, upon application , cause investigation to be made, and if
the Board of Directors shall find that such union or association is at fault , and fails
or retuses to make reparation or otherwise remedy such violation or refusal to the
satisfaction of the Board of Directors , and if this corporation after investigation shall
desire to resist the demands of such union or member thereof, this corporation shall
render to such member or members of this corporation the fullest moral support, and
shall pay such expenses incurred by such member in any strike , lockout or other labor
trouble caused by such action of the union, association or member or members thereof,
as shall be approved and limited by the Board of Directors of this corporation in
advance . .-Article XX.
m Roth testified that, as far as he knew, this authorization has never been revoked.
1020 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The letter of July 30, 1937, referred to above, indicating that the
employers wished to let the February 4 agreement renew itself, was
signed by Roth, president of Waterfront Employers Association of
the Pacific Coast, on behalf of the four regional associations.
Grievances and ordinary disputes are usually referred to the Labor
Relations Committee of the port. In the small ports in the North-
west, however, the employers generally have one man to represent
them. This representative takes care of routine questions. If, how-
ever. a dispute of any importance occurs, two more representatives
are sent by the Association involved, and they, together with the
local representative, act as the employers' committee to deal with
the dispute.
In cases where the dispute is of some importance, either because it is
in a large port, or because it involves a problem of general application,
the local Labor Relations Committee will be advised in the matter by
Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast or by the
regional association. Foisie, who, since the creation of the Coast Asso-
ciation, has been acting as assistant to Roth, has on occasion gone into
the port to assist in the settlement.
When the dispute threatens a stoppage of \vork, Roth or Foisie or
other officials confer with Bridges or Meehan, secretary of I. L. W. U.
District No. 1, or other District officials, in an attempt to reach a
settlement. The record contains a large number of communications
from Roth to Bridges and to Meehan, all dealing with unsettled dis-
putes. Both Bridges and Meehan testified as to other communications,
telephone conversations, and personal conferences.
Thus, in actual practice, matters of importance are referred to Roth's
office.: Before the formation of the Coast Association, they were
referred to the office of Foisie, coast coordinator, or Gregory Har-
rison, counsel for the companies. The history of the formation and
actual operation of the various associations of companies on the
Pacific Coast convinces us that, with respect to longshore labor, these
companies function entirely through the regional associations and
through Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast, and
that the regrional associations operate as a closely integrated unit.
The Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast is an association
of owners and operators of steam schooners which are engaged in the
carrying of lumber from the Northwest ports. There is a supple-
mentary agreement, between International Longshoremen's Associa-
tion, Pacific Coast District No. 38 and the Shipowners Association,
21 Roth is president of Waterfiont Employeis Association of the Pacific Coast, Water-
front Employers Association of San Francisco, and of Pacific-American Shipoowneis' Asso-
ciation, an organization of American-owned lines having their principal ports on the Pacific
Coast and organized for the purpose of representing its members in connection with labor
matters relating to off-shore as distinguished from on-shore labor The three Associations
occupy the same offices in the Federal Reserve Building in San Francisco
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1021
attached to the February 4, 1937, agreement , which provides that all
the provisions of that agreement are to apply to the signatories, except
the provision defining the scope of longshore work. The crews on
these steam schooners usually do some of the work ordinarily classi-
fied as longshore work and the steam schooner operators did not want
to be bound by the provisions of the agreement with respect to that
portion of the longshore work done by the crews.
Plant stated that the negotiations for the supplementary agreement
were carried on separately. He testified, however, that in the nego-
tiations terminating the 1936-1937 strike, the Coast Committee broke
themselves up into subcommittees. The negotiations for the Ship-
owners Association were, according to Plant, carried on by Lunny, a
member , of the Coast Committee, and Ralph Myers , president of the
Shipowners Association. Bridges testified that Plant did most of the
talking for the Shipowners' Association of the Pacific. Lunny, though
a member of the Coast Committee, spent most of his time on steam-
schooner affairs . Finally, there was a joint conference and the agree-
ment and supplementary agreement were entered into.
It will be noted that the supplementary agreement merely serves
to except steam schooners from one provision of the main agreement.
In all other respects, the individual companies which are members of
the Shipowners Association are affected in the same manner as are the
companies belonging to the regional associations.
Longshoremen are hired in the same manner and on the same
terms ; disputes go through the same Labor Relations Committee in
the port; and when a settlement cannot be reached the matter is re-
ferred by the companies to Bridges . Lunny and Myers are members
of the Board of Directors of Waterfront Employers Association of
the Pacific Coast. The record contains evidence of a letter on the
letterhead of the Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific
Coast, dated April 7, 1937, addressed to E. S. Coates, manager of
the Waterfront Employers Association of Portland and signed by
F. T. Foisie with the notation that copies were to be sent to A. E.
Roth and Ralph Myers. The letter concerns a dispute in the opera-
tion of a steam schooner. Roth stated, when questioned about this
letter, that the Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific
Coast advises the Shipowners Association in matters concerning labor
policy. It is evident that the labor relations of the members of the
Shipowners Association of the Pacific Coast are handled in the same
manner and through the same agencies as are the labor relations of
the members of the 'regional associations.
VI. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
In its petition'for investigation and certification of representatives
I. L. W. U . District No: 1 asserts that the unit most appropriate for
1022 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the purposes of collective bargaining consists of all the workers em-
ployed at longshore labor in the Pacific Coast ports of the United
States. It is the contention of the companies that the appropriate
bargaining unit for longshoremen must be one- restricted to those
longshoremen in the employ of a particular employer at a particular
Pacific Coast port.
The history of bargaining and the history of employee organiza-
tion, as set forth in previous sections, are completely persuasive of
the fact that a unit including all the workers employed at longshore
labor in the Pacific Coast ports of the United States is the one that
will insure to employees the full benefit of their right to self-organi-
zation and to collective bargaining, and will otherwise effectuate the
policies of the At.
Particularly, the failure of the longshoremen to achieve any satis-
factory collective bargaining agreements when the bargaining was
on a local scale is to be contrasted with the highly successful collec-
tive bargaining achievements when the longshoremen bargained as a
coast unit. From 1934 on, the longshoremen have rejected proposed
agreements which were not coast-wide in scope, have bargained as a
coast unit, and have been working under one coast-wide agreement.
In dealing with the employers, the longshoremen have done so
through the District, as has been shown.22
In dealing with the employers, the longshoremen have cooperated
with the other maritime crafts and with the crew personnel. The
proposals of May 28, 1934, and June 16, 1934, were rejected by the
longshoremen because they did not provide a settlement for the other
group on strike. The Joint Strike Committees in 1934, the Coast
Negotiating Committee and the Coast Policy Committee in 1936, and
the existence of the Maritime Federation of the Pacific, all bear wit-
ness to the identity of interest and the method of cooperation of the
longshoremen and the other maritime groups. These maritime
unions, including the American Radio Telegraphists' Association, the
Marine Engineers Beneficial Association, the Marine Cooks and
Stewards of the Pacific, and West Coast Local No. 90 of the Masters,
Mates and Pilots of America, are organized on a coast basis, and the
longshoremen have found that in order to work effectively with them,
they too had to organize on a coast basis.
The history of collective bargaining and of the organization of
the longshoremen, and the sacrifice of some of the longshoremen on
the maximum-loads agreement, are ample evidence of their desire
for a coast unit. Several clauses in the I. L. W. U. constitution are
22 Further, convention rulings decree that the locals are not to enter into separate port
agieemcnts Respondent Exhibit No. 13 lists many port agreements, but almost none of
them involve the longshore locals.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1023
also indicative of the desires of the longshoremen in this regard.
Thus Article XIII reads :
SECTION 1. When any I. L. W. U. local is forced to dissolve
due to its membership being thrown out of work by the ceasing
of the sole source of employment, the locals of the Sub-district
in which the dissolved local is located will be required to accept
the unemployed members on a pro rata basis, provided that if
the Sub-district locals cannot absorb said members, they will
be divided. pro rata amongst the locals of the salve craft of
District 1.
Under this clause, longshoremen from the ports of Stockton and
Garibaldi are now working in other ports. Article XVIII,23 which
provides that any longshoreman in the District may obtain a visiting
card which will give him work privileges in a port other than his
own, for a period of 30 days, also shows the feeling of identity of
interest among the longshoremen.
Action by the longshoremen, if it is to be effective, must be con-
certed and coordinated. At the present time, sympathy among the
longshoremen is such that, in the absence of other factors, they will
refuse to work ships diverted from a port in which there has been
a lock-out. Unless the longshoremen's activities are completely in-
tegrated, therefore, there will be disorganized strikes. Bridges
stressed the fact that such strikes must be avoided by the longshore-
men, if they are to keep their organization. To this end, the District
officials, in April 1936, ordered the longshoremen to work ships
diverted from San Francisco, where there had been a lock-out, and,
in January 1938, the I. L. W. U. officials ordered the working of
ships diverted from Seattle, where there had been a lock-out. The
lessons of the disastrous local strikes in 1916 and 1919 have brought
home to the longshoremen the fact that action that is not coast-wide
will result in a harmful set-back to their self-organization.
The companies contend that the working rules differ in various
ports, and that that is indicative of the impropriety of a coast unit.
It must be noted, however, that wages, hours, methods of hiring,
methods of settling grievances, payment for penalty cargoes, and
maximum sling loads are uniform on the Pacific Coast. There are
2 'Article XVIII reads :
SECTION 1. Any member of District 1 so desiring may procure from his local secre-
tary a visiting card showing that he is paid up to date and in good standing, which
will entitle him to the following privileges in any local of the District of a similar
craft
SECTION 2 Work privileges accorded to a local member shall be for a period not to
exceed thirty days unless agreeable to the local being visited
Snoriom 3 All locals of the District shall be required to accept a minimum of visi-
tors of one per cent of their membership, but no local should be visited more than once
a year by any one member unless agreeable to local so visited.
1024 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
divergences in working rules only in minor matters. Thus, for ex-
ample, the longshoremen in the San Francisco area are paid for
their "travelling-time," which is the time spent travelling across San
Francisco Bay to their work, if that is necessary. Other differences
in working rules among the ports may be due to differences in cargo
handled. Even in these minor matters, the drive is for uniformity
among the ports. Thus in the Northwest the longshoremen have a
committee to meet with the companies and to decide upon working
rules for the longshoremen in the locals on Puget Sound, including
the Aberdeen and Grays Harbor locals. This committee consists of
representatives from the I. L. A. Locals in that area, as well as from
the I. L. W. U. locals. Similarly, in the Columbia River area, the
negotiations, carried on in Portland, are on a regional basis.
Since the essential working rules are on a coast-wide basis, and
since port differences occur only in nonessential matters, the argument
against a coast unit, based on working rules, does not carry much
weight. This is especially true when it is considered that the working
rules are determined upon, in the main, by the Labor Relations Com-
mittees which are set up by the coast-wide agreement.
The numerous factors which have been pointed to as indicating that
the coast unit is the one which will best insure to the longshoremen the
full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bargain-
ing, are all reflections of the organization of the employers. , The
history of bargaining and of the longshoremen's organizations is a
vivid portrayal of the experiences of the longshoremen as they learned
that, since their employers were acting together on a coast basis, they,
too, would have to build a coast organization which would parallel the
organization of the employers. The desires of the men for a coast unit
are the result of their failures when they acted on a port basis, and
their success when they acted with their fellow longshoremen on the
coast. The imperative need of the longshoremen for the coast unit
and the dangers of smaller units arise because the companies on the
Pacific Coast which use their labor are organized on a coast basis.
We have set out in some detail the history of the organization of
these companies and we have considered the present set-up of the
four regional associations, Shipowners' Association of the Pacific
Coast, and Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast.
The organization of the employers is another important factor which
militates toward the conclusion that the coast unit is the one most
appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining.
It is contended that the Board has no jurisdiction to go beyond the
individual company in deciding upon an appropriate unit of em-
ployees. The Board, however, is expressly given the authority to de-
cide that the "employer" unit is the unit most appropriate for purposes
of collective bargaining. The Act includes within the term employer
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1025
"any person acting in the interest of an employer, directly or indi-
rectly," and the term person. "includes one or more . . . associa-
tions
We have, in our examination of the functioning of the regional asso-
ciations, pointed out how the associations engaged in collective bar-
gaining for the individual companies, how the associations took charge
of the operation and execution of the agreement, and how they dealt
with the longshoremen in all matters involving labor relations. In-
deed, the contract so regulates the hiring, dispatching, conditions of
work, payment for work, and method of settling grievances, that the
individual company can be said to exercise very few of the functions
which are the essential attributes of the employer-employee relation-
ship. The regional associations clearly act in the interest of these
various companies. We have also shown the close articulation between
the regional associations, effected by Waterfront Employers Associa-
tion of the Pacific Coast, and the fact that, in actual practice, the
existence'of the Coast Association resulted in the regional associa-
tions' acting through the Coast Association as an integrated unit.
What has been stated as applicable to the various regional associa-
tions is substantially true of Shipowners' Association of the Pacific
Coast.
We find that the workers who do the longshore work in the Pacific
Coast ports of the United States for the companies which are members
of Waterfront Employers of Seattle, Waterfront Employers of Port-
land, Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco, Water-
front Employers Association of Southern California, and Shipowners'
Association of the Pacific Coast constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure to
these workers the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to
collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the
Act.
F. T. Foisie testified that the term "longshoremen" quite frequently
includes everyone who works either on board ship or on the docks,
but that in the various ports there may be subdivisions of longshore-
men, dock workers, grain handlers, etc. The exact meaning of these
latter categories and the type of work which the men in these cate-
gories handle, varies from port to port. The type of work which
the individual longshoreman does may also vary. The categories
"permit men" and "casual men" also have different meanings in the
various ports. It will be necessary, therefore, to discuss by individ-
ual ports the groups of men which we conclude are to be compre-
hended in the term "longshoremen." This will be done in Section
IX below.
The walking boss is the individual who has general supervision
over the loading and discharging of the entire ship. The I. L. W. U.
1026 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
desires to have the walking bosses included in the unit; the majority
of the walking bosses are Union members. The I. L. A. had a sep-
arate local for walking bosses but the I. L. W. U. refuses to charter
such a local. Walking bosses are not dispatched or hired through
the hiring hall, they follow the ship, except in the case of small
companies, where the walking boss is on an hourly basis and may
be in the employ of more than one company. Walking bosses have
memoranda of understanding with the individual company, not with
the employers' associations. Because of this difference in their re-
lations with employers, walking bosses are not to be considered as
within that category of longshoremen which constitutes the appro-
priate unit defined above.
VII. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
Gregory Harrison , counsel for the companies , testified that the
letter of July 30, 1937, from Roth to Bridges , in which it was stated
that Waterfront Employers Association of the Pacific Coast would
not give notice of a desire to terminate the agreement , and the reply
of the same date, in which Bridges stated that the longshoremen,
too, wanted to renew, and in which he noted the new name "Water-
front Employers Association of the Pacific Coast ," and stated that
"by action of our Executive Board in compliance with the vote of
our membership we have likewise changed our name to International
Longshoremen 's and Warehousemen 's Union," were both put into a
circular which was mailed to all members of the associations. The
letters were widely commented upon by the newspapers on the Coast.
At this time , the referendum had been taken, the July 18 meeting of
the Executive Board at Seattle had been held , the C. I. O. charter had
been applied for, and only a few formal steps remained before the
change of affiliation would be completely effected. Thus , the em-
ployers were permitting the agreement to renew itself when they
had full knowledge of the situation among the longshoremen and
knowledge that they were now dealing with the I. L. W U.
And in the execution of the contract the employers have been con-
stantly dealing with the I. L. W. U., for it is the I. L. W. U. which
has been taking care of the detailed performance of the contract,
except in the case of the four Puget Sound ports which voted against
affiliation with the C . I. O. The longshoremen who work the cargo
on the ships and clocks are I . L. W. U. members . The hiring halls
from which the longshoremen are dispatched to the work are main-
tained jointly by the employers and the I. L. W. U.; the Labor
Relations Committees , whicli operate the hiring halls and which set-
tle disputes , consist of representatives of the regional associations
and representatives of the I. L. W. U. Thus in San Francisco. for
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1027
example, employer members of the Labor Relations Committee,
appointed by the executive members of Waterfront Employers Asso-
ciation of San Francisco, have been regularly meeting and working
with the I. L. W. U. representatives on the Committee. The dis-
patchers in the hiring halls are all I. L. W. U. men. Preference of
employnlnnt is given to I. L. W. U. men. The union to which the
employers file complaints against individuals for violation of the
agreement is the I. L. W. U., and the union which penalizes the indi-
vidual longshoremen for such violation, as provided for in the agree-
ment, is the I. L. W. U. In important disputes, Roth and Foisie con- .
tact Bridges and Meehan, the president and secretary of the I. L. W.
U. The I. L. W. U. has, in effect, completely taken over the con-
tract, and the employers have, in actual fact, acquiesced and have
joined with the I. L. W. U. in the execution of the contract.
But the associations and companies have refused to give formal
recognition to the I. L. W. U. Their communications to Bridges and
Meehan, in 1937, have been addressed to these two in their former
capacities as I. L. A. officials, although on at least two occasions,24
they have been asked to send communications to the International
Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union. At the present time,
they address their communications to Harry Bridges, without any
further designation, at an address on Market Street, San Francisco.
Occasionally, there are lapses. Thus, checks for the support of
the hiring halls in San Francisco, which are drawn on the account
of the Labor Relations Committee, have two lines for signatures,
under one of which is printed "WEA of SF" and under the other is
printed "ILW 1-10." The record also contains a telegram, dated
March 10, 1938, from Roth to "Matt Meehan, International Long-
shoremen's and Warehousemen's Union," which deals with a labor
dispute.
But formal recognition of the factual situation has always been
refused. In li letter to Henry Schmidt, president of the San Fran-
cisco local of the I. L. W. U., Roth denies that the I. L. W. U. had
been recognized as the bargaining agency and states :
I am writing to reaffirm our position of neutrality in the
present inter-union controversy between the I. L. A. and
I. L. W. U. Neither the San Francisco Waterfront Employers
Association nor the Pacific Coast Waterfront Employers Asso-
ciation has taken any position on the questions of which union
is the proper collective, bargaining agency, or which union is
entitled to administer the existing contract. On the contrary,
we have repeatedly informed both you and Mr. Bridges that
u The record contains two letters, dated August 18, 1937, and August 26 , 1937 , in which
Bridges calls this to the employers ' attention
1028 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
the Waterfront Employers would not take any position in favor
of or against either of the parties to this controversy. My exact
words were "we propose to walk straight down the middle of
the road and let nature take its course".
In a letter froln Roth to members of the Association, dated October
9, 1937, he states that the Association has taken no' position on the
question of which union shall act as agent of the men in negotiating
future renewals or modifications of the contract.
While the practice of the parties during the period of the contract
indicates an acceptance in fact of the I. L. W. U. District No. 1 as
the labor organization party to the contract, it nevertheless is not
necessary in this case to decide the precise legal status of the
I. L. W. U. with respect to the contract. In considering the exist-
ence of a question concerning representation we need only consider
that the last day for notice of a desire to modify or terminate the
contract is July 31, 1938, that the employers refuse to recognize the
I. L. W. U. and that it is essential that the proper collective bargain-
ing agency be designated, so that negotiations for the next period
may be facilitated and properly conducted.
We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation
of longshoremen doing longshore work for the companies which are
members of the various regional associations.
VIII. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION OF REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE
We find that the question concerning representation which has
arisen, occurring in connection with operations of the companies
described in Section I above, tends to lead to labor disputes burden-
ing and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce.
IX. DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The longshoremen in each of the ports, with few exceptions,25
signed cards designating the I. L. W. U. as their exclusive repre-
sentative for purposes of collective bargaining,26 which were pre-
sented in evidence. Lists of the longshoremen doing the work in each
of the ports were also put into evidence. However, the lists for
Port Orford, Oregon, and Newport, Oregon, were not presented, ap-
parently through inadvertence, nor was any mention made of Port
Blakely, Washington, although that port is referred to in the peti-
tion. These three ports are small ones as indicated by the number
25 It was noted above that the longshoremen in the poets of Tacoma, Olympia, Port
Angeles, and Anacortes did not join in the change of affiliation
26 The cards read : "I am employed exclusively as a longshoieman I hereby designate
.and select the International Longshoremen's and warehousemens Union as my exclusive
representative for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to sates of pay. wages
hours of employment and other conditions of employment.'
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1029
of longshoremen who voted in the June 1937 referendum, which was
7 in Port Blakely, 26 in Newport, and 14 in Port Orford. A state-
ment 17 of the per capita tax paid by the longshore locals for the
months of June and September 1937 indicates that, for Port Orford,
Oregon , I. L. A. Local 38-115 paid a per capita tax in June on 24
members and that I. L. W. U. Local 1-5 paid a per capita tax in
September for 24 members; that for Port Blakely, Washington,
neither I. L. A. Local 38-2, nor I. L. W. U. Local 1-43 paid any per
capita tax ; and that for Newport, Oregon, I. L. A. Local 38-110 paid
a per capita tax in June on 32 members and I. L. W. U. Local 1-53
paid a per capita tax in September on 34 members. Thus, it is evi-
dent that the results could not be affected by including the lists of
longshoremen for these three ports .211
Counsel for the I. L. A. and the I. L. A. Locals argued that the
designation of representatives made in these cards should not be con-
sidered because of the fact that the nien were forced to sign the
cards. However, they presented no evidence whatsoever to support
their contentions, except in the case of the port at Bellingham. The
record would support the opposite contention, for the I. L. W. U.
showed that it took great care to have no check made upon nonsigners
and to have the signing of the cards a strictly voluntary act on the
part of the men.
San Diego.-The longshoremen who have, in the last 6 months,
been doing the longshore work in San Diego are the registered long-
shoremen who are members of I. L. W. U. Local 1-29, and permit
card holders. A document 29 purporting to list the registered long-
shoremen in the Port of San Diego, furnished to the port by Water-
front Employers Association of Southern California, was introduced
into evidence. However, D. C. Mays, president of I. L. W. U. Local
1-29, testified that the list was not up-to-date and that it included
the names of men who have not been working in the port for some
time. He introduced into evidence a list 30 of members of the Local
as of February 11, 1938, and a list" of permit card holders, also
compiled from the records of the Local, and said that the men on
these lists were those who have been doing the longshore work in the
port during the last 6 months. In the absence of any objections to
these lists and of any denial of their accuracy, we will accept them
as representing the total of the longshore workers in the port. There
are 83 registered men and 33 permit card holders.
7 Petitioner Exhibit No. 74.
21 Besides the cards, the returns on the June referendum are also strongly indicative of
the sentiment of the longshoremen . The vote among the individual locals on the question
of affiliation with the C I 0 is set out in appendix "H"
21 Board Exhibit No. 23. This exhibit contains 137 names.
S0 Petitioner Exhibit No. 47.
31 Petitioner Exhibit No. 48.
i
1030 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Ninety-three cards designating the I. L. W. U. as the exclusive col-
lective bargaining representative were introduced into evidence.
These cards were witnessed by Mays and J. Wilbur, secretary of the
Local. Each of the witnesses personally knew the men signing the
cards. The names on the cards have been checked and have been
found to correspond with the names on the lists.
There is no I. L. A. Local operating in San Diego. The men are
hired through the hiring hall which is maintained jointly by Local
1-29 and by Waterfront Employers Association of Southern Cali-
fornia. Relations with employers are carried in the same manner
as they were when the Local was I. L. A. Local 38-9.
Santa Barbara, Ventura and vicinity.-Substantially all the long-
shore work in these harbors was formerly done by members of I. L. A.
Locals 38-105 and 38-129. These men are now members of I. L.
W. U. Local 1-46.
Thirty-two cards were introduced into evidence. These cards were
witnessed by Edmund Masson, secretary-treasurer of Local 1-46,
who testified that lie knew all the signers personally. His own card
was also introduced. Masson identified the signature of Joseph
Pico, whose card was not witnessed. The names on the cards have
been checked and have been found to correspond to the names on
it list of longshoremen furnished by Waterfront Employers Asso-
ciation of San Francisco.32 That list contains 75 names.
When a line is not drawn through the word "exclusively" in the
sentence "I am employed exclusively as a longshoreman" the signer
is a member of the Union ; when a line is drawn through the word
"exclusively" as it was in the case of 13 of the cards, the signer
is not a registered longshoreman but has appeared on the pay roll
of the ships coming into these ports and has worked on the boats.
The latter group will be included in the unit.
San Pedro and Los Angeles harbor.-The work in the port is done
by the registered longshoremen and the permit men. The latter
group consists of men who are given work after the regular long-
shoremen have all been sent out. In the past these men made their
living exclusively or substantially from longshore work, but at the
present time work is slack and less than half of the men are receiv-
ing any work. Men on the,permit list come and go; there is no indi-
cation that these men are now anything more than casuals. They
will not be included in the unit.
ii The list contains 75 names Only . 36 cards , altogether , were introduced into evidence
Masson testified that he did not know of any longshoremen regularly employed in the last
6 months in Santa Barbara and Ventura harbors who did not sign cards. It appears likely,
therefore, that the list, which was submitted, pursuant to agreement, after' the bearing
had ended , contains many names of extra men However, for the purpose of determining
the question of majority , this list will be taken as accurate.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1031
The cards of registered longshoremen that have been introduced
into evidence have been compared with the list of longshoremen fur-
nished to the Board by counsel for Waterfront Employers Associa-
tion of Southern California and 2,209 cards were found to be signed
by men on that list. There are 2,655 registered longshoremen.
The signing of the cards was witnessed by Ernest Bowen, president
of I. L. W. U. Local 1-13, and Elmer Mevert, a member of the Local.
These men knew most of the longshoremen personally. In case of
doubt the signers were asked for their union membership books, so
that their signatures could be compared.
I. L. W. U. Local 1-13 has about 2,516 members. It received its
charter on October 7, 1937. Prior to that time the men had been in
I. L. A. Local 38-82 which had some 2,640 members. The officials
of I. L. A. Local 38-82 had been restrained by Court action from
joining with the I. L. W. U. They, together with about 14 men
who desired to remain in the I. L. A., and about 100 more men,
stayed in I. L. A. Local 38-82, which had been restrained by the
Courts from affiliating itself with the C. I. O. The 100 men re-
Imained in the I. L. A. Local "to protect the interests of the other
2,500." The cards included the cards signed by the men who have
remained in the I. L. A. Local.
Everett, Washington.-The work in the Port of Everett is per-
formed by the 258 longshoremen whose names appear on the list
furnished by counsel for Waterfront Employers of Seattle. There
are some called "permit men" who do work occasionally but they are
not earning enough to support themselves and depend largely on
other sources for their livelihood. They will not be included in the
unit. Two hundred twenty-five of the registered longshoremen
signed the cards.
H. F. McKennlnan, the dispatcher at Everett, stated that I. L.
W. U. Local 1-32 calve into existence as such in September 1937.
Since then, the Labor Relations Committee has continued to func-
tion in the same way. The longshoremen are represented on the
Committee by I. L. W. U. men; the companies have two local repre-
sentatives and Ringenberg, of the Waterfront Employers of Seattle,
on the Committee. There has been no change in the way the hiring
hall has been operated. Dailey, who is the representative of the
Employers Association in the Port, places the orders for longshore-
men for all of the four or five companies which require longshore
work in the port.
Before the change in affiliation, the Local was I. L. A. Local 38-76.
There are no I. L. A. men in Everett at the present time.
106791-33-vol vii-66
1032 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Aberdeen, Washington.33-Cards presented from the Port of Aber-
deen were witnessed by Joseph Kit Koski and Les Lambert, who
knew each of the signers personally. The work in the port is per-
formed by the registered longshoremen of whom there are 386. One
hundred seventy-five cards signed by registered longshoremen were
presented in evidence. More cards have not been signed because of a
rumor to the effect that signature would prevent the aliens, mostly
Finns who were longshoremen in the port, from getting their citizen-
ship papers, and because many of the longshoremen took the position
that they had already voted to affiliate with the C. I. 0., that they
had their I. L. W. U. books, and that further signing of cards was
unnecessary.
The men in the port are dispatched through the same hiring hall
they have had since 1934. The dispatcher is\an I. L. W. U. member.
The Labor Relations Committee in the port consists of four repre-
sentatives from the companies, including Ringenberg, of Waterfront
Employers of Seattle, and four representatives of the Union. Since
the coming into existence of I. L. W. U. Local 1-24, there has been
no change in the way labor relations with the companies have been
carried on.
The men were formerly organized in I. L. A. Local 38-77. There
are now no I. L. A. men in the port.
Port Gamble and Poulsbo, Washington.`.'-Tile work in Port
Gamble is done by the 55 registered longshoremen named in the list
of registered longshoremen submitted by Gregory Harrison. Fifty
cards signed by these longshoremen were submitted in evidence.
These cards were witnessed by William F. Falkner and Ward King,
both of whom knew all the signers personally.
Since the change of affiliation, there has been no difference in the
way labor relations in the port are handled. The men who did the
work in the port were formerly members of I. L. A. Local 38-88;
-they are now members of I. L. W. U. Local 1-51.
Port Townsend, Washington.-The work in the port is done by
the registered longshoremen and eight men who had been working
in Ludlow," where operations have ceased. These eight men, who
derive their livelihood from longshore work, are dispatched from the
hiring hall in Port Townsend after the registered longshoremen have
been sent out. Thirty-two cards signed by registered longshoremen
and Ludlow men 36 were introduced into evidence. There are 28
registered longeshoremen.
Al The port is at Grays Harbor, which is centrally located between the towns of Hoquiam
and Aberdeen.
Poit Gamble is 7 miles from the town of Poulsbo.
Port Ludlow is 20 miles from Port Townsend by road or by water.
31 The ei °ht Ludlow men are Martin Parkko , Neil Stark , Oscar W. Henningson , George
Zvoodley, Francis Patsy, Joseph Patsy , Alfred Eldridge , and William Woodley.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1033
Four of the persons named on the list of registered longshore-
men in Port Townsend have been transferred and are no longer ac-
tive longshoremen. They are P. Popowinski, C; Biewater, R. Ely,
and H. Olsen.
The change in name and affiliation from I. L. A. Local 38-96 to
I. L. W. U. Local 1-55 did not result in any change in the manner
in which labor relations with employers are conducted. There are no
I. L. A. men doing longshore work at the present time at Port
Ludlow or Port Gamble.
Raymond, Washington.-The longshore work at Raymond is per-
formed by the 116 registered longshoremen operating on a list of
registered longshoremen at Willapa Harbor'37 and casual workers. It
is impossible for a casual worker to make his living at longshore
work; they do longshore work along with various other odd jobs
they can pick up. They will not be included in the unit.
One hundred seven cards signed by registered longshoremen and
witnessed by Jack Price, who was at one time the dispatcher, and
Bissenger, the present dispatcher, both of whom knew each of the
signers personally, were introduced into evidence.
All the longshoring work is performed by members of I. L. W. U.
Local 1-1. The present membership of the Local is substantially the
same as the membership of I. L. A. Local 38-92, prior to the change
in name and affiliation; there is no I. L. A. Local now functioning in
Port Raymond.
The coming into existence of Local 1-1 did not result in any
change in the planner in which labor relations are maintained, other
than a decision to have the Labor Relations Committee meet every
30 clays instead of irregularly. The three workers' representatives
on the Labor Relations Committee are members of the I. L. W. U.
Local.
Seattle, Wallington.-The longshore work in the Port is per-
formed by registered loigshoremen, permit men, registered dock
men, and grain handlers. Permit men are men who have not yet
been admitted to the Union, although they will eventually become
Union members. There is a separate board in, the hiring hall for
then. They contribute to the maintenance of the hiring hall, make
their living exclusively by longshore work, and up until the recent
slack period, have spent most of their time working as longshoremen.
Grain handlers are not registered longshoremen. They are men
who do their own work first and are then sent out to do longshore
work if they are needed. There is no indication that their long-
shore work is in any way regular and they will be excluded from the
unit.
37 Willapa harbor is a consolidated Port for the towns of Raymond and South Bend.
The Port of Willapa Harbor is centrally located between the two towns.
1034 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Frank Smith, vice president of I. L. W. U. Local 1-19, and at one
time a dispatcher, witnessed cards of registered longshoremen and
permit men. He testified that he knew each of the signers. Dewey
Bennett,38 secretary of I. L. W. U. Local 1-19, and Thomas R.
Richardson, president, also witnessed cards and testified as to the
authenticity of the signatures.
A list of the registered longshoremen, dock men and permit men
in Seattle contains 1,511 names.39 One thousand three hundred
forty-three of these men signed cards.
I. L. W. U. Local 1-19 is functioning under the old I. L. A. Local
38-12 constitution which they have changed in minor respects. The
hiring hall has four I. L. W. U. dispatchers and is jointly main-
tained. The Local has used the same minute book from August 16,
1934, to March 3, 1938. There is no I. L. A. Local in Seattle whose
members do any of the longshore work at the port.
Vancouver, Washington.-The longshore work in the Port of Van-
couver is done by longshoremen hired through the hiring hall. No
longshore work is performed by members of any I. L. A. Local.
The list of registered' longshoremen includes grain handlers and
dock workers. H. Mason, dispatcher at the hiring hall, checked the
names of individuals on the roster of Vancouver longshoremen who
are not regular longshoremen. Most of the names checked are those
of casual workers. Fred Brown and H. Hopson have transferred
from the Local. Of the 95 regular longshoremen, known personally
to Mason, 87 signed cards which he witnessed.
Reedsport, Oregon.40-All longshore work in the Port is now per-
formed by members of I. L. W. U. Local 1-48 or by permit men who
have put in applications to join the Union. When a boat- comes into
the dock, the captain or the mate of the ship tells the dispatcher,
E. E. Doyle, a member of the Union, how many men he wants and
the dispatcher telephones the men.
There is no list of registered men for the Port. Waterfront Em-
ployers Association of San Francisco supplied a list containing 28
names of longshoremen and permit men who are to be included in the
unit. Twenty-three of these men signed cards witnessed by Tom
Richman, secretary of the Local. He knows each of the men
personally.
Rainier, Oregon.-No longshore work is performed in Rainier ex-
cept by men hired from the hiring hall, which is jointly maintained
by the employers and by the I. L. W. U. There is no I. L. A. Local
ss Bennett referred to "service men " From his description of that group , it Is evident
that he was referring to "permit men "
30 Twelve men are deceased They have not been counted.
40 Reedsport is on Winchester Bay, about 28 miles from Coos Bay. Occasionally when
help is needed , Coos Bay Local sends to Reedsport for extra men.
I
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1035
in Rainier whose members perform longshore work in the Port. Ray
Williams, president of I. L. W. U. Local 1-45, which was, before the
change in affiliation, I. L. A. Local 38-81, testified with respect to a
list of longshoremen in the Port, that C. Girt, Byron Hirtzell,
H. Jessee, and J. Rauch are casuals, A. Bustrim has quit longshoring
work and John Bitte, while still a member of the Local, has not been
working for a long period. Excluding these persons, 29 longshore-
men are named on the list. Twenty-seven cards witnessed by Ray
Williams were introduced. Williams knew the signers to be the per-
sons whose names appear on the cards. His own card was witnessed
by Marvin Girt, secretary of the Local.
Astoria, Oregon.-The work in the Port is performed by regis-
tered longshoremen and dock workers. The dock workers do the
trucking on the dock when a ship comes in for salmon or flour. Al-
though the dock workers are regular members of the Union, they
do not work under the longshore arrangement and will therefore
be excluded from the unit. The list of registered longshoremen and
dock workers has been checked by A. Williams, a member of I. L.
W. U. Local 1-50, which was, prior to the change in affiliation, I. L. A.
Local 38-85. He has put a small "d" in front of the name of each
dock worker, and a check mark in front of casual workers who do
not make their living at longshore work and who are not to be in-
cluded in the unit. There are 178 registered longshoremen. Ninety
of these men signed cards.
North Bend, Oregon.-One hundred thirty-three cards signed by
longshoremen who earn their living exclusively in longshore work
in North Bend were witnessed by E. V. Schults, the recording secre-
tary of I. L. W. U. Local 1-12. He was sure of the identity of each
of the signers. The work in the Port is performed by I. L. W. U.
members and permit men who are not members of the Union but
who earn their living primarily or exclusively from longshore work
in North Bend.
Schults has gone through the list of Coos Bay longshoremen 41
and has put a check mark in front of the name of each person on
the list who is not now a,regular Coos Bay longshoreman. There
are 140 names without checks.42
St. Helens, Oregon.-C. Kremer, secretary of I. L. W. U. Local
1-68 at St. Helens, and C. Stewart, a member, put check marks in
front of the names of casual workers who do not customarily make
a living at longshore work, which appear on a list of St. Helens long-
shoremen prepared by Waterfront Employers of Portland. J. F.
41 Noith Bend is on Coos Bay Harbor.
42 Witness believed that there were other men working as longshoremen who are not on
the list which was furnished by counsel for the companies , but the Union did not object to
the use of the list.
1036 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Brown, whose name appears on the list, has died. C. Schmidt is an
injured longshoreman who occasionally works a day or sometimes
two or three days. He belongs to the Local. He will be included in
the unit; casual workers will not be included.
Forty-one cards witnessed by Kremer and Stewart were intro-
duced. Both witnesses knew the persons signing the cards to be the
persons whose names appear on the cards. There are 73 persons on
the list whose names were not checked.
Longview, Washington.-Dewey Van Brunt, the dispatcher at
the hiring hall in Longview, checked through the roster of Long-
view longshoremen and put a check mark in front of the name of
each person who is not a regular longshoreman. One hundred sev-
enty-five of the 235 regular longshoremen signed cards. Van Brunt,
who witnessed the signing of the cards, testified that he was per-
sonally acquainted with each of the signers.
Bandon and Port Orford, Oregon.`-The torrential rains in the
vicinity of Portland made it impossible for the men who could have
testified with respect to the cards signed by the longshoremen in
these two ports to get to the hearing. An exhibit in the form of a
letter from the Waterfront Employers of San Francisco lists 21
longshoremen and 5 permit men who work at Bandon.
Newport, Oregon.44-D. Harding, who witnessed the signing of
the cards by Newport longshoremen, is an invalid and was unable
to leave his home to attend the hearing. The Trial Examiner ruled
that an affidavit by Harding concerning these cards was inadmissible.
Portland, Oregon.-The persons doing longshore work in Port-
land are classified as longshoremen, dock workers, grain handlers,
miscellaneous workers, permit men, and Garibaldi men.
The miscellaneous group includes those who tie and untie ships
and a few sweepers. They are not classified as regular longshore-
men, and, since the record contains no further information concern-
ing them, they must be excluded from the unit.
The Garibaldi men are those who used to work in the Port of
Garibaldi which has been closed down because of sand drifting into
the Port. The District prorated the longshoremen in the Port and
13 of them work in Portland. They will be included in the unit.
The grain handlers operate under a separate contract. However,
they plug in on the same board as do the regular longshoremen. They
do both grain work and regular longshoring work; they are required
to take the grain job first, if there is any available. The usual bill
of lading provides for the delivery of grain by the terminal or the
4"Port Orford has a population of 300 and is located approximately 30 miles south of
Bandon
"Newport is a port on Yaquina Bay, about half way between the Columbia River and
Coos Bay. It is a town with approximately 1,530 people.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1037
shipper to the ship's side, rather than to the first place of rest on a
ship's dock, as usually in the case of other cargo. The grain handler
thus is a longshoreman with respect to the grain, carrying the grain
to the ship if the grain is sacked, or operating the grail elevator or belt
to the ship's side. When there is no grain work these men do regular
longshoring work. The roster of longshoremen submitted by Water-
front Employers of Portland puts longshoremen, dock workers, and
grain handlers together in one list. The grain handlers will be in-
cluded in the unit.
Dock workers have a separate board in the hiring hall on which
to plug in. Formerly their function was to transfer the cargoes
from the railroad cars or trucks to the dock floor. For this they
were paid 85 cents an hour. During the last 2 years, however, the"
method of operation has changed and lift machines and lift boards
are used. The lift machines have a hoist running in front of car-
riers. The lift board is brought to the cargo and the cargo is placed
on it. The machine then carries it to the ship's sling, the sling is
put under the cargo, and the cargo is lifted to the boat. Work with
this new method is classified as longshore work and the dock workers
receive regular longshoremen's pay for doing it. Ninety per cent
of the work done by dock workers is now classified as longshore
work. Besides, dock workers also do the same type of work that
longshoremen not classified as dock workers do; they are sent out on
this work after the men on the "big board," which is the regular
longshoremen's and grain handlers' board, have been sent out. Dock
workers will be included in the unit. Permit men will also be
included.
The lists supplied by, Waterfront Employers of Portland name
1,099 longshoremen, including grain handlers and dock workers and
126 permit men. Seven hundred seventy-four cards were presented
in evidence. The witnesses to the signing of the cards testified that
they either knew the men personally, checked the signatures on the
cards with the signatures on the Union book, or in the case of permit
men, called in mutual friends when they were not sure of the identity
of the signer.
Bellingham, Washington.-The longshore work at Bellingham is
performed by the 159 men named on a list furnished by Gregory
Harrison. One hundred thirty-seven of these men signed cards wit-
nessed by John Mallahan, secretary-treasurer of I. L. W. U. Local
1-7, who knew each of the signers personally.
After the change in affiliation of the Bellingham Local, they con-
tinued to use the same quarters, the same minute book and the same
equipment in the hall. -
1038 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Action had been taken by the Local in January or February 1938
to the effect that anyone who did not sign a card would not be
permitted to work for one week. Phil Taylor and Herman Dale tried
to start an I. L. A. Local and applied to the I. L. A. for a charter.
Local 1-7 fined both these men $150 because of their activities. Dale
has been injured since July 27, 1937, and has been unable to work.
Taylor was not given any work after the fine had been imposed-be-
cause he refused to pay the fine. L. B. Sulgrove, counsel for the
I. L. A., stated that his purpose in introducing the testimony of Dale
and Taylor was to show the method used to obtain the pledge cards
and stated that more testimony was not introduced because men
who testified would not be given any work.
It is only necessary to note that the action taken against Dale and
'Taylor was not because of failure to sign the cards, but because
of their attempt to start an I. L. A. Local, that any action with re-
spect to failure to sign was action taken by a majority of the Local,
and that the secret ballot in the June 1937 referendum on the ques-
tion of C. I. O. affiliation resulted in a vote of 124 to 12 in favor of
such affiliation.
Tacoma, Washington.-The list 45 of registered longshoremen and
registered dock workers at Tacoma contains 662 names.
Olympia, Washington.-The list 45 of registered longshoremen and
permit men in Olympia contains 170 names.
Anacortes, Washington.-The list" of registered longshoremen
in Anacortes contains 44 names.
Port Angeles, Washington.-The list 45 of the registered longshore-
men in Port Angeles contains 114 names.
Eagle Harbor and Freeland, Washington.-The list of the long-
shoremen in Eagle Harbor and Freeland was furnished by the com-
panies and contained 72 names.
Crescent City, California.-All the longshore work in this Port is
performed by the 13 men who signed the cards. All but William
'Gettings earn their livelihood exclusively as longshoremen. Gettings
works as an extra. He will not be included in the unit.
The list of registered longshoremen and permit men at Crescent
City contains 15 names.
Monterey, California.-A. Martin, Gallego, a longshoreman in
Monterey, stated that there are only 17 longshoremen in the port and
that other men who know how to do longshore work are called in
when needed. The list submitted by Waterfront Employers Asso-
ciation of San Francisco, however, contains 77 names. On this state
.of the record, the list of the Association will be taken as accurate.
4 Each of these lists has been submitted by the companies.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1039
Gallego witnessed the signatures of eight men whom he knew per-
sonally. Gallego also identified the signature of Felix Urquida whose
card was witnessed by M. B. Brown. Gallego could not identify the
signatures of seven other men and this group of seven cards will not
be considered.
Eureka, California.-Because the roads between Eureka and San
Francisco had been washed out it was impossible for anyone who
could authenticate the cards signed in the Port of Eureka to get to
the hearing. A list of the longshoremen and "extras" in the Port
of Eureka was presented in evidence. The "extras" are, in fact, per-
mit men who are called upon after the regular longshoremen have
been sent out. They will be included in the unit. The list contains
52 names.
San Francisco, California.-The hiring hall in San Francisco cov-
ers the San Francisco Bay region. Men work either on the "pre-
ferred" gangs which work for one company nearly all the time, or on
"casual" gangs which may be dispatched to any employer at any
time. There are 85 preferred gangs and 85 casual gangs in the port.
The word "casual," in San Francisco, does not mean that a long-
shoreman is only occasionally employed but is used to distinguish
the men on the casual gangs from those on the preferred gangs.
There are also longshoremen in San Francisco who work from the
"plug board," and who are used to fill vacancies in either preferred
or casual gangs. The plug board is a board with a series of holes
numbered in order. Longshoremen who work from the plug board
are provided with a plug which is about 2 inches long and is of the
thickness of a lead pencil and which bears a number corresponding
with the number on the brass check which each longshoreman carries.
The longshoreman puts his plug in the lowest numbered available
hole and is sent out after all the men whose plugs preceded his have
been sent out.
There are two types of permit men; those who are registered long-
shoremen and are not yet members of the Union, and those who are
neither members of the Union nor registered longshoremen but who
are working on permits issued by the joint Labor Relations Com-
mittee. ,
The longshoremen in all of the afore-mentioned groups are to be
included in the unit. There are 4,039 names on the list of registered
longshoremen at SanFrancisco and 345 permit men. Three thousand
four hundred ninety-four cards of registered longshoremen and 289
cards of permit men, signed by men named on the list, and properly
authenticated, were introduced into evidence.
Except in the case of a few cards, the cards are stamped "regis-
tered," indicating registered longshoremen; "member," indicating a
1040 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
member of the Union; and "approved," indicating that the card is
that of a permit man who is neither registered nor a member of the
Union but who is entitled to work out of the hiring hall.
Summary
Port Cards
Total
number
of em-
ployees
Port Cards
Total
number
of em-
ployees
San Diego------------------------ 93 116 Bandon------------------------- -------- 26Santa Barbara, Ventura and vi- Port Orford_______________________ ________ ________
cmity-------------------------- 32 75 Nen port------------------------ -------- --------San Pedro and Los Angeles Har- Portland________________________ 774 1,099
bor----------------------------- 2,209 2,695 Bellingham ----------------------- 137 159
Everett___________________________ 225 258 Tacoma-------------------------- -------- 6,2
Aberdeen- 175 386 Olympia------------------------- -------- 170Port Gamble and Poulsbo_ 50 55 Anacortes________________________ ________ 44
PortTownsend___________________ 4632 4636 Port Angeles_____________________ ________ 114
Raymond________________________ 107 116 Eagle Harbor_____________________ ________ 39
Seattle____________________________ 1,343 1,511 Freeland ------------------------- ----- 33
Vancouver________________________ 87 95 Crescent City____________________ 12 15
Reedsport------------------------ 23 28 Monterey ------------------------ 9 77
Rainier--------------------------- 27 29 Eureka-------------------------- -------- 52Astoria___________________________
North Bend
90
133
178
140
San Francisco____________________ 3,783
-
4,384
______________________
St Helens________________________ 41 73 Total_______________________ 9,557 12,880
Longview________________________ 175 235
46 This figure includes the eight Ludlow men.
The summary indicates that of the 12,850 longshoremen in the ap-
propriate unit-, 9,557 have signed cards designating International
Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, District No. 1, as their
representative for purposes of collective bargaining.
We find that International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's
Union, District No. 1, has been designated and selected by the major-
ity of the longshoremen in the appropriate unit as their representa-
tive for the purposes of collective bargaining. It is, therefore, the
exclusive representative of all the longshoremen in such unit for
the purposes of collective bargaining, and we will so certify.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record of the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of longshoremen in the Pacific Coast ports of the United
States, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and
(7) of the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The workers who do the longshore work in the Pacific Coast
ports of the United States for the companies which are members of
Waterfront Employers of Seattle, Waterfront Employers of Port-
land, Waterfront Employers Association of San Francisco, Water-
front Employers Association of Southern California, and Shipowners'
Association of the Pacific Coast, constitute a unit appropriate for the
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1041
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section
9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act.
3. International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, Dis-
trict No. 1, is the exclusive representative of all the workers in such
unit for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning
of Section 9 (a) of the National Labor Relations Act.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended,
IT IS HEREBY CERTIFIED that International Longshoremen's and
Warehousemen's Union, District No. 1, has been designated and se-
lected by a majority of the workers who do longshore work in the
Pacific Coast ports of the United States for the companies which
are members of Waterfront Employers of Seattle, Waterfront Em-
ployers of Portland, Waterfront Employers Association of San
Francisco, Waterfront Employers Association of Southern Cali-
forma, and Shipowners' Association of the Pacific Coast, as their
representative for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that,
pursuant to the provisions of Section 9 (a) of the Act, International
Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, District No. 1, is the
exclusive representative of all such workers for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining, in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employ-
ment and other conditions of employment.
APPENDIX A
1. International Longshore-
men's a n d Warehouse-
men's U n i o n, District
No. 1.
2. Shipowners' Association of
the Pacific Coast.
3. Waterfront Employers As-
sociation of the Pacific
Coast.
4. Waterfront Employers of
Seattle.
5. Waterfront Employers of
Portland.
6. Waterfront Employers Asso-
ciation of San Francisco.
7. Waterfront Employers Asso-
ciation of Southern Cali-
fornia.
8. International Long s h o r e-
men's Association , District
No. 38.
9. International Longshore-
men's & Warehousemen's
Union, Local 1-13.
10. Mr. A. H. Petersen.
11. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-82, Inc.
12. Ainsworth & Dunn Dock Co.
13. Alaska Steamship Company.
1042 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
'14. Albina Dock Company.
15. American Foreign S. S.
Corp. -
16. American - Hawaiian S. S.
Co.
17. American Mail Line.
18. Ames Terminal Company.
19. Anderson & Middleton Lum-
ber Co.
20. Angle - Canadian Shipping
Co.
21. Arlington Dock Company.
22.' Arrow Stevedore Co.
23. Associated Banning Co.
24. Associated Banning Con2-
pany (Berth 146).
25. Balfour, Guthrie & Co.
26. Barber Line.
27. Baxter & Company.
28. Beadle Steamship Co. Ltd.
29. Blue Funnel Line.
30. Blue Star Line.
31. Border Line Transportation
Co.
32. Brady-Hamilton Steve. Co.
33. Bulk Carriers Corp.
34. Burns Steamship Company.
35. California Steve. & Ballast
Co.
36. Canadian Transport Co.
37. Cargill, Incorporated.
38. Chamberlin S. S. Co. Ltd.
39. W. R. Chamberlin & Co.
40. Coastal Steamship Co.
41. Coastwise Line.
42. Columbia River Steve. Co.
43. Consolidated Olympic Line.
44. Coos Bay Lumber Company.
45. Crescent Wharf & Ware-
house Co.
46. Deming, Roberg & Williams.
47. Dispatch Steve. & Cont. Co.
48. •Dodwell Dock & Whse. Co.,
Inc.
49. Dollar Steamship Lines.
50. Dollar Steamship Lines Inc.,
Ltd.
51. Donaldson Line.
52. Donaldson Line (Balfour,
Guthrie & Co.).
53. Katherine Donovan S. S. Co.
54. Donovan Lumber Co.
55. East Asiatic Company.
56. East Waterway D o c k &
Whse. Co.
57. El Dorado Oil Works.
58. Elliott Bay Service Co.
59. Empire Lumber Co.
60. Everett Stevedoring Co.
61. S. S. Freeman Co.
62. French Line.
63. Fruit Express Line.
64. Furness (Pacific) Line.
65. General S. S. Corp.
66. General Steve. & Ballast Co.
67. Girdwood Shipping Com-
pany.
68. Gorman Lumber Co.
68-A. Gorman Steamship Co.
69. Grace Lines, Inc.
70. W. R. Grace & Company.
71. Gray & Owners, S. S. Daisy.
72. Grays Harbor Stevedore Co.
73. Great Northern Railway.
74. Griffiths & Sprague Steve.
75. James Griffiths & Sons, Inc.
76. Hamburg-American Line.
77. Hammond Lumber Com-
pany.
78. Hammond Shipping Co.,
Ltd.
79. J. R. Hanify Company.
80. Hart-Wood Lumber Co.
81. Chas. H. Higgins Co.
82. Hobbs-Wall & Company.
83. Holland-America Line.
84. Holmes Eureka Lumber
Company.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
85i. Independent Stevedore Co.
86. International Steve. Co.
87. Interocean Line.
88. Interocean Steamship Corp.,
Ltd.
89. Interstate Terminals.
90. Italian Line.
91. Johnson Line.
92. A. B. Johnson Lumber Co.
93. W. J. Jones & Son.
94. The Jordan Company.
95. "K" Line.
96. Kerr S. S. Company, Ltd.
97. Kingsley Company of Cali-
fornia.
98. The Kingsley Co. of Califor-
nia.
99. Kingsley Navigation Co.
100. Kinney Shipping Company.
101. Kitsap Lumber Co.
102. Kitsap S. S. Company (San
Pedro, Cal.).
102-A. Kitsap S. S. Company
(Tacoma, Wash.).
103. Klaveness Line.
104. Knutsen Line.
105. Kolusai Kisen Kaisha.
106. J. Lauritzen Line.
107. Lawrence-Phillips Lumber
Company.
108. Lawrence-Phillips S. S. Co.
109. Leslie Salt Company.
110. Mr. Fred Linderman.
111. L. A.-S. F. Navigation Co.
112. Luckenbach Gulf S. S. Co.
113. Luckenbach S. S. Company.
114. Luckenbach Gulf Steamship
Co.
115. H. E. Mansfield, Inc.
116. Marine , Terminals Corp.
(San Francisco).
117. Marine Terminals Corp.
(Terminal Island. Cal.).
1043
118. J. E. Marshall, Inc.
119. Matson Navigation Co.
120. Matson Terminals, Inc.
121. Matthews & Owners, S. S.
Daisy.
122. McCormick S. S. Co.
123. Metropolitan Stevedore Co.
124. Mitchell Stevedoring Co.
125. Mitsubishi Shojen Kaisha.
126. Mitsui & Co.
127. J . J. Moore & Co., Inc.
128. Moore S. S. Co.
129. N. Y. K. Line.
130. National S. S. Co.
131. Nippon Yusen Kaisha.
132. North German Lloyd.
133. North Pacific Coast Line.
134. Northern Stevedores, Inc.
135. Northland Transportation
Co.
136. Norton , Lilly & Co.
137. Oceanic Terminals.
138. John C . Ogden.
139. Fred Olsen Line.
140. The Olsen Line, Inc.
141. Fred Olson Line.
142. Oliver J. Olson & Co.
143. Olympia Stevedoring Com-
pany.
144. Olympic Steamship Co., Inc.
145. Olympic Stevedoring Co.
146. Oregon Stevedoring Co.
147. Outer Harbor Dock & Wharf
Co.
148. Owens-Parks Lumber Co.
149. P. L. Transportation Co.
150. Pacific Argentine B r a z i l
Line.
151. Pacific -Atlantic S. S. Co.
152. Pacific Java Bengal Line.
153. Pacific Lighterage Corp.
154. Pacific Steve. & Ballasting
Co.
1044 NATIONAL LAHOH RELATIONS BOARD
155. Panama Mail S. S. Company.
156. Paramino Lumber Co.
157. Portland Stevedoring Co.
158. Powell Shipping Company.
159. Prince Line.
160. Prince Line, Ltd.
161. Puget Sound Stevedoring
Co.
162. Quaker Line.
163. Capt. J. Ramselius.
164. Redwood Steamship Co.
165. E. L. Reitz Lumber Com-
pany.
166. Reitz S. S. Co.
167. Rothschild - International
Steve. Co.
168. Royal Mail Lines.
169. Royal Mail Lines, Ltd.
170. Salmon Terminals, Inc.
171. San Francisco Steve. Co.
172. Santa Ana S. S. Co.
173. Schafer Bros. Steamship
Company.
174. Schafer Bros. S. S. Lines.
175. Schafer B r o s. Steamship
Lines.
176. Schirmer Stevedoring Co.
177. Seaboard Steve. Company.
178. Seaboard Steve. Corp.
179. Seaboard Stevedoring Corp.
180. Seaboard Steve. Corp. of
Wash.
181. Shepard S. S. Company.
182. Sivertsen J. Martin Steve.
Co.
183. States S. S. Co.
184. Soto Shipping Company,
P. F.
185. Southland Steamship Co.
186. Southwestern Stevedoring
Co.
187. Sudden & Christenson.
188 Stipple Docks, Inc.
189., Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.
190. Transatlantic S. S. Co.
191. Transpacific Transporta-
tion Co.
192. Twin Harbor Stevedoring
Co.
193. Union Sulphur Co.
194. United Fruit Co.
195. United Ocean Transport
Co., Ltd.
196. Viking Steamship Co.
197. Virginia Dock & Trading
Co.
198. Washington Stevedoring
Co.
199. Frank Waterhouse & Co. of
Can. Ltd.
200. Western Stevedore Co.
201. Westfal-Larson Co. Line.
202. Weyerhaeuser S. S. Line.
203. Wheeler-Hallock Co.
204. Willapa Harbor Stevedor-
ing Co.
205. E. K. Wood Lumber Co.
206. Wamashita Shipping Co.
(Portland, Ore.)
207. Wamashita Shipping Co.
(Seattle, Wash.)
208. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-142.
209. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-114.
210. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-97.
211. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-83.
212. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-86.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
213. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-89.
214. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-78.
215. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-82.
216. International Longshore-
men's Association, Local
38-79.
217. International Longshore-
men's Association, Dis-
trict No. 38.
218. P. W. Walker.
219. R. A. Patterson.
220. C. H. Lindegren.
221. C. H. Lindegren.
222. M . D. Rogers.
223. Elmer Bruce.
224. O . M. Benton.
225. A. L. Bebo.
226. W . J. Hale.
227. Jack Edwardson.
228. J . O. Bowlbey.
229. Joe Sumpton.
APPENDIX B
SHIPOWNERS ' ASSOCIATION
Anderson & Middleton Lumber
Co.
Baxter & Co., J. H.
Beadle Steamship Co., Ltd.
Burns Steamship Co.
Chamberlin & Co., W. R.
Coastal Steamship Co.
Coastwise Steamship & Barge Co.
Consolidated Olympic Line.
Coos Bay Lumber Co.
Dispatch Stev. & Cont. Co.
(Empire Lumber Co., char-
terers.)
Donovan Lumber Co.
Freeman & Co., S. S.
Gorman Lumber Co.
Griffiths & Sons, James, Inc.
(Griffiths Steamship Co.)
Hammond Shippln; Co., Ltd.
Hanify Co., J. R.
P1art-Wood Lumber Co.
Higgins, Chas. H.
Hobbs. Wall & Co.
1045
Johnson Lumber Co., A. B,
Kingsley Company of California.
Kitsap Lumber Co.
Lawrence-Philips Steamship Co.
Linderman, Fred.
L. A.-S. F. Navigation Co.
McCormick Steamship Co.
Moore Steamship Co.
National Steamship Co.
Olson Line, Inc.
(Olson & Co., Oliver J.)
Owens-Parks Lumber Co.
P. L. Transportation Co.
Paramino Lumber Co.
Ramselius, Capt. J.'
Redwood Steamship Co.
Reitz Steamship Co.
Schafer Bros. Steamship Lines.
Sudden & Christenson.
Southland Steamship Co.
Wheeler-Hallock Co.
Wood Lumber Co., E. K.
1046 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX C
WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF THE PACIFIC COAST
SHIPPING MEMBERS
Alaska Steamship Company.
American Foreign S. S. Corp.
American Hawaiian S. S. Co.
American Mail Line.
Anglo-Canadian Shipping Co.
Barber Line.
Baxter & Company.
Blue Funnel Line.
Blue Star Line.
Bulk Carriers Corp.
Burns 'Steamship Company.
Canadian Transport Co.
,Chamberlin S. S. Co. Ltd.
Coastal Steamship Co.
Coastwise Line.
Consolidated Olympic Line.
Coos Bay Lumber Company.
Donaldson Line.
11^atherine Donovan S. S. Co.
East Asiatic Company.
Empire Lumber Co.
S. S. Freeman Co.
French Line.
Fruit Express Line.
Furness (Pacific) Line.
General S. S. Corp.
AGirclwood Shipping Company.
Gorman Steamship Co.
Grace Lines, Inc.
James Griffiths & Sons, Inc.
Hamburg-American Line.
Hammond Shipping Co., Ltd.
J. R. Hanify Company.
Hart-Wood Lumber Co.
Chas. H. Higgins Co.
TIobbs-Wall & Company.
Holland-America Line.
Interocean Line.
,-Italian Line.
Johnson Line.
A. B. Johnson Lumber Co.
"K" Line.
Kerr S. S. Company, Ltd.
Kingsley Navigation Co.
Kitsap S. S. Company (Tacoma,
Wash.)
Kitsap S. S. Company (San Pe-
dro, Cal.)
Klaveness Line.
Knutson Line.
Kokusai Kisen Kaisha.
Lauritzen Line, J.
Lawrence-Phillips S. S. Co.
Mr. Fred Linderman.
Luckenbach S. S. Company.
Matson Navigation Co.
McCormick S. S. Co.
Mitsui & Co.
Moore S. S. Co.
National S. S. Co.
North German Lloyd.
Northland Transportation Co.
Norton, Lilly & Co.
N. Y. K. Line.
John C. Ogden.
Fred Olsen Line.
Oliver J. Olson & Co.
Olsen Line, Inc.
Owens-Parks Lumber Co.
Pacific-Atlantic S. S. Co. (Quaker
Line).
Panama Mail S. S. Company.
Paramino Lumber Co.
P. L. Transportation Co.
Prince Line, Ltd.
Capt. J. Ramselius.
Reitz S. S. Co.
Royal Mail Lines, Ltd.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
Santa Ana S. S. Co.
Schafer Bros. S. S. Lines.
Schafer Bros. Steamship Lines.
Shepard S. S. Company.
States S. S. Co.
Sudden & Christenson.
Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.
Transatlantic S. S. Co.
Transpacific Transportation Co.
Union Sulphur Co.
1047
United Fruit Co.
United Ocean Transport Co., Ltd.
Viking Steamship Co.
Frank Waterhouse & Co. of Can-
ada, Ltd.'
Westfal-Larson Co. Line.
Weyerhaeuser S. S. Line.
Wheeler-Hallock Co.
Wood Lumber Co., E. K.
Yamashita Shipping Co.
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS
Ainsworth & Dunn Dock Com- Interstate Terminals.
pany. W. J. Jones & Son Inc.
Albina Dock Company. The Jordan Company.
Ames Terminal Company. Leslie Salt Company.
Arlington Dock Company. Longview Stevedoring Company.
Associated Banning Company. H. E. Mansfield Inc.
B. & H. Stevedoring Corp. Marine Terminals Corp.
Bellingham Contracting & Steve- Mitchell Stevedoring Co.
doring Co. Mitchell Stevedoring Company.
Brady Hamilton Stevedore. Northern Stevedores Inc.
Cargill Incorporated. Oceanic Terminals.
Columbia Basin Terminals. Olympia Stevedoring Co.
Columbia R i v e r Stevedoring Olympic Stevedore Co.
Company. Oregon Stevedoring Company.
Deming, Roberg & Williams, Inc. Pacific Stevedoring & Ballasting
Dispatch Stevedore & Contracting' Co.
Company.
Dodwell Dock & Warehouse Co.
East Waterway Dock & Ware-
house Co.
El Dorado Terminal Co.
Elliott Bay Service Company.
Everett Stevedoring Company.
General Stevedore & Ballast Co.
Grays Harbor Stevedore Com-
pany.
Griffiths & Sprague Stevedoring
Co.
Independent Stevedore Company.
International Stevedoring Com-
pany.
Portland Stevedoring Co.
Powell Shipping Co.
Puget Sound Stevedoring Co.
Rothschild International Steve.
Co.
Salmon Terminals.
The San Francisco Stevedoring
Co.
Stevedore Service Co.
Supple Docks Inc.
Thomas & Kear.
Twin Harbor Stevedoring Co.,
Washington Stevedoring Co.
Western Stevedore Co.
Willapa Harbor Stevedoring Co.
106791-38-vol. Vn-67
1048 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOATID
APPENDIX D
WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS OF SEATTLE MEMBERSHIP LIST
DEC. 7, 1937
Ainsworth & Dunn Dock Co.
Alaska Steamship Company.
Ames Terminal Company.
American Foreign S . S. Corp.
(Matthewson Shipping Co.,
Agents).
American - Hawaiian Steamship
Co.
American Mail Line.
Anglo-Canadian Shipping Co.
(Girdwood Shipping, Co.,
Agents).
Arlington Dock Company.
Arrow Line.
(Sudden & Christenson.)
Blue Funnel Line.
(Dodwell & Co., Ltd., Agents.)
Blue Star Line, Inc.
Border Line Transportation Co.
Canadian Transport Company.
(Paul A. Umoff, Agent.)
Cargill, Incorporated.
Coastal Steamship Company.
Coastwise Line.
Deming, Roberg & Williams.
Dodwell Dock & Whse. Co., Inc.
Donaldson Line.
(Balfour, Guthrie & Co.)
East Asiatic Company, Inc.
East Waterway Dock & Whse. Co.
Elliott Bay Service Co.
Everett Stevedoring Co.
Fred Olson Line.
(Girdwood Shipping Co.,
. Agents.)
French Line.
(General S. S. Co.)
Fruit Express Line.
(International Pacific Coast
Corp.)
Furness (Pacific) Ltd.
(Burchard & Fisken, Agents.)
Girdwood Shipping Co.
Grace Line (W. R. Grace & Co.).
Grays Harbor Stevedore Co.
Great Northern Ry.
Griffiths & Sprague Stevedoring.
Griffiths, James & Son.
Hamburg-American Line.
(Sudden & Christenson.)
Hammond Shipping Co.
Johnson Line of Stockholm.
(W. R. Grace & Co.)
Jordan, The Company.
Kingsley Co. of California.
Kerr S. S. Co. (Silver Java Pa-
cific).
(Burchard & Fisken, Agents.)
Klaveness Line.
(Sudden & Christenson.)
Knutsen Line.
(Interocean S. S. Corp.)
Lauritzen Line, J.
(Girdwood Shipping C o . ,
Agents.)
Leslie Salt Co.
Libera Line.
(General S. S. Co., Agents.)
Luckenbach Gulf Steamship Co.
Luckenbach Steamship Co., Inc.
Matson Navigation Co.
(Alexander & Baldwin.)
Matson Terminals, Inc.
Mitchell Stevedoring Co.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
Moore, J. J. & Co., Inc.
(W. L. Macquarrle, Agent.)
McCormick Steamship Co.
Mansfield, Inc., H. E.
Nippon Yusen Kaisha.
North German Lloyd.
Northern Stevedores, Inc.
Northland Transportation Co.
Norton, Lilly & Co.
(Agents for Isthmian S. S.)
Olympia Stevedoring Company.
Olympic Steamship Co., Inc.
(Consolidated-Olympic S. S.
Co.)
Olympic Stevedoring Co.
Pacific Java Bengal Line.
(Burchard & Fisken, Agents.)
Puget Sound Stevedoring Co.
Quaker Line.
Rothschild-International Steve.
Co.
1049
Royal Mail Lines, Ltd.
Salmon Terminals, Inc.
Santa Ana Steamship Co.
Seaboard Stevedoring Corp. of
Wash.
Shepard Steamship Company.
Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.
Transatlantic S. S. Co., Ltd.
(General S. S. Co.)
Twin Harbor Stevedoring Co.
Virginia Dock & Trading Co.
Washington Stevedoring Co.
Waterhouse , Frank & Co. of Can-
ada.
Western Stevedore Co.
Westfal-Larsen Line.
(General S. S. Co.)
Weyerhaeuser Steamship Co.
Willapa Harbor Stevedoring Co.
Yamashita Shipping Co.
APPENDIX E
WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS OF PORTLAND MEMBERSHIP ROSTER AS OF
FEBRUARY 3, 1938
American Hawaiian S. S. Co.
American Mail Line.
Anglo-Canadian S. S. Co.
Balfour Guthrie & Co.
Bulk Carriers Corp.
Chamberlin S. S. Co.
Coastwise Line.
Fred. Olsen Line.
French Line.
Fruit Express Line.
Furness (Pacific) Ltd.
General Steamship Corp.
Grace Line.
Hammond Shipping Co., Ltd.-
Italian Line.
Johnson Line.
Kerr Steamship Company.
Kinney Shipping Company.
J. Lauritzen Line.
Luckenbacli Steamship Co.
Matson Navigation Company.
McCormick Steamship Co.
North German Lloyd.
North Pacific Coast Line.
Pacific Argentine Brazil Line.
Powell Shipping Company.
Schafer Bros. S. S. Co.
States Steamship Co.
Sudden & Christenson.
Swayne & Hoyt.
Transpacific Trar sp. Co.
Weyerhaeuser Steamship Co.
Wheeler-Hallock Co.
Yamashita Shipping Co.
1050 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
STEVEDORES
Brady-Hamilton Steve. Oregon Stevedoring Co.
International Steve. Co. Portland Stevedoring Co.
W. J. Jones & Son. Seaboard Stevedoring Corp.
STEVEDORES-OUTPORTS
Columbia River Steve. Co. Independent Stevedore Co.
DOCK OPERATORS
Albina Dock Company. . Supple Docks, Inc.
Interstate Terminals. Total-46 members.
Oceanic Terminals.
APPENDIX F
MEMBERS OF WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO
SHIPPING AND STEVEDORE MEMBERS
American-Hawaiian SS Co.
Arrow Stevedore Co.
Associated Banning Co.
'Calif. Steve. & Ballast Co.
Coos Bay Lumber Co.
Dollar Steamship Lines.
Donaldson Line,-Ltd.
French Line.
Furness (Pacific) Ltd.
General Steamship Corp.
General Steve. & Ballast Com-
pany.
Grace Line.
Hamburg American Line.
Holland America Line.
Johnson Line.
Kerr Steamship Company.
Luckenbach SS Company.
Luckenbach Gulf SS Co.
Marine Terminals Corp.
Matson Navigation Co.
McCormick Steamship Co.
North German Lloyd.
Pacific Lighterage Corp.
Mitchell Stevedoring Co.
Panama Mail Steamship Co.
San Francisco Steve. Co.
Schirmer Stevedoring Co.
Seaboard Steve. Corp.
Sivertsen J. Martin Steve. Com-
pany.
Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.
Transpacific Transp. Co.
United Fruit Company.
ASSOCIATE MEMBERS
Chamberlin , W. R. & Co.
El Dorado Oil Works.
Hammond Shipping Co., Ltd.
The Kingsley Co. of Calif.
Pacific Stevedoring & Ballasting
Co.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
APPENDIX G
1051
MEMBERSHIP , LIST OF WATERFRONT EMPLOYERS ASSOCIATION .OP
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
DECEMBER 30, 1937
American Hawaiian Steamship Company.
Arrow Line. (See Sudden &- Christenson.)
Associated Banning Company.
Bank Line. (See Marshall, Inc., J. E.)
Barber Line :
Barber Steamship Lines, Inc.
Barber Wilhelmson Line.
Baxter & Company, J. H.
Blue Funnel Line (c/o Dodwell & Company).
Blue Star Line. (See Marine Terminals Corp.)
Calmar Line. (See Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.)
Chamberlin Steamship Company, W. R.
Coos Bay Lumber Company.
Crescent Wharf & Warehouse -Company.
Dollar Steamship Lines Inc., Ltd.:
Tacoma & Oriental Steamship Company.
Mexican Mail Steamship Company.
French Line. (See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.)
Fruit Express Line (c/o Dodwell & Company).
Furness Line (c/o Furness (Pacific) Ltd.).
General Steamship Corporation, Ltd.:
French Line.
Libera Line (Italian Line).
Shepard Line.
Silver Line.
Transatlantic Steamship Company of Gothenberg.
United Ocean Transport Company.
Westfal Larsen Company.
Silver Java Pacific Line
Pacific Java Bengal Line.
Kerr Steamship Company
Grace & Company, W. R.:
Panama Mail Steamship Company.
Johnson Line.
Gray & Owners, S. S. Daisy, c/o Freeman & Co., SS.
Gulf Pacific Line. (See Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.)
Gulf Pacific Mail Line. (See Swayne & Hoyt, Ltd.)
Hamburg-America Line. (See Sudden & Christenson.)
1052 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Hammond Lumber Company :
Hammond Shipping, Company.
Hanify, J. R.
Holland-America Line, c/o Furness (Pacific) Ltd.
Holmes Eureka Lumber Company (Redwood Steamship Company).
Interocean Steamship Corp., Ltd.:
Interocean Line.
"K" Line (Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha).
Knutsen Line.
Pacific Coast Direct Line.
Weyerhaeuser Steamship Company.
Isbrandtsen-Moller (Maersk Line). (See Soto Shipping Co., P. F.)
Johnson Line. (See Grace & Company, W. R.)
"K" Line (Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha). (See Interocean Steamship
Corp.)
Kerr Steamship Company. (See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.)
Kingsley Company of California, c/o McCormick Steamship Com-
pany.
Klaveness Line. (See Sudden & Christenson.)
Knutsen Line. (See Interocean Steamship Corp.)
Lawrence-Philips Lumber Company.
Libera Line (Italian Line). (See General Steamship Corp.)
Luckenbach Steamship Co., Inc.:
Luckenbach Gulf Steamship Company.
McCormick Steamship Company :
McCormick Lumber Company, Chas. R.
Marine Terminals Corp.:
Blue Star Line.
Marshall, Inc., J. E.:
Bank Line.
Matson Navigation Company :
Matson Steamship Company.
Matson Terminals Corp.
Oceanic Steamship Company.
Matthews & Owners, Daisy, c/o Freeman & Company, S. S.
Metropolitan Stevedore Company.
Mexican Mail Steamship Company. (See Dollar Steamship' Lines,
Inc., Ltd.)
Mitsubishi Shojen Kaisha, c/o Wickersham & Co., W. H.
Nippon Yusen Kaisha.
Oceanic Steamship Company. (See Matson Navigation Company.)
Olsen Line, Fred. (See Soto Shipping Co., P. F.)
Olson & Co., Oliver J.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 1053
Outer Harbor Dock & Wharf Company.
P. L. Transportation Company (Pacific Lumber Company).
Pacific Coast Direct Line. (See Interocean Steamship Corp.)
Panama Mail Steamship Lines. ( See Grace & Co., W. R.)
Prince Line, c/o Furness ( Pacific) Ltd.
Ramselius & Company, J.
Reardon Smith Line. ( See Sudden & Christenson.)
Reitz Lumber Company, E. L.
Royal Mail Lines , c/o Furness (Pacific) Ltd.
Schafer Bros. Steamship Company.
Seaboard Steve. Company.
Shepard Lirie. ( See General Steamship Corp ., Ltd.)
Silver Line. ( See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.)
-Silver Java Pacific Line. ( See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.)
Southwestern Stevedoring Company.
Soto Shipping Company, P. F.:
Isbrandtsen -Moller Company (Maersk Line).
Olsen Line, Fred.
Sudden & Christenson :
Arrow Line.
Hamburg American Line.
Klaveness Line.
Reardon Smith Line.
Swayne & Hoyt,-Ltd.:
Calmar Line.
Gulf Pacific Line.
- Gulf Pacific Mail Line.
Tacoma & Oriental Steamship Company. ( See Dollar Steamship
Lines Inc. Ltd.)
Transatlantic Steamship Company of Gothenberg . ( See General SS
Corp. Ltd.)
United Fruit Company.
United Ocean Transport Company. ( See General Steamship Corp.,
Ltd.)
Westfal-Larsen Company. ( See General Steamship Corp., Ltd.)
Weyerhaeuser Steamship Company. ( See Interocean Steamship
Corp., Ltd.)
Wood Lumber Company, E. K.
1054 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX H
- RESULTS OF BALLOT-PACIFIC COAST DISTRICT I. L.' A.
Question : "Shall we affiliate with the C. I. O. V' ,
Local
No. City
Yes No Na l City Yes No
38-2 Port Blakely______________ 5 2 38-115 Port Orford_______________
Port
14 0
38-4 Bandon ___________________ 13 3 38-116 Ketchikan 15 4
38-9 San Diego________________ 69 4 38-117 Seattle____________________ 257 43
38-12 Seattle____________________ 836 296 38-118 Sacramento_______________ 142 8
38-36 Seattle____________________ 37 90 38-119 Wilmington -------------- 50 16
38-44 San Francisco------------- 2,445 411 38-120 San Diego________________ 34 3
38-67 Vancouver________________ ________ ______ 38-122 Tacoma___________________ 2 0
38-76 Everett___________________ 91 39 38-123 Portland__________________ 331 59
38-77 Aberdeen_________________ ________ ____ 38-125 Ventura__________________ 15 0
38-78 Portland__________________ 734 169 38-126 Vancouver________________ 58 33
38-78A Portland__________________ 7 87 38-130 Victoria___________________ ________ ------
38-79 San Francisco_____________ 2,220 703 38-131 Bellmgbam_______________ 80 5
38-80 Longview_________________ 145 12 38-132 San Francisco ------------- 22 8
38-85A Astoria___________________ 15 14 38-135 Portland --__-______________
nd
81 7
38-82 San Pedro________________
San
1,500 444 38-137 ______________Hilo, Hawaii 236 0
38-83 Anacortes 4 22 38-140 Monterey_________________
Monterey
10 0
38-84 St Helens_______________
elms-
-------- ------ 38-142 Skagway ----------------- 14 0
38-86 Angeles --------------Port 40 43 38-143 Tacoma ------------------- 15 0
38-88 Poulsbo___________________ 43 . 2 38-104 Juneau___________________ 23 2
38-89 Olympia------------------ -------- ------ 38-144 Ketchukan---------------- 55 0
38-90 San Francisco_____________ 91 227 38-145 Eureka ------------------- 12 5
38-91 San Pedro________________ 63 9 38-146 Stockton ------------------ 7 3
38-92 Raymond_________________ 100 1 38-147 New Westminster-------- 21 1
38-93 Stockton__________________ 104 2 138-78 Portland__________________ 3 1
38-94 North Bend______________ 58 12 38-81 Rainier ------------------- 7 11
38-95 Winchester Bay _________ 11 0 38-85 Astoria___________________ 69 83
38-96 Port Townsend----------- 26 0 38-94A North Bend______________ ________ ______
38-97 Tacoma___________________ 126 320 38-109 Stockton ___-______________ 164 11
38-98 Bellingham_______________ 124 15 38-112 Cordova ____-__
38-100 San Francisco ------------- 100 0 38-121 Harbor___________________ ________ ------
38-101 San Francisco_____________ 176 22 38-124 San Francisco_____________ ________ -----
38-102 Stockton__________________ 97 7 38-127 New Westminster-------- 28 0
38-103 Eureka___________________ 46 11 38-129 Seward ------------------- -------- ------
38-105 Santa Barbara_______ _____ 18 2 38-134 Los Angeles_______________ 282 23
38-106 Los Angeles_______________ 44 6 38-136 Honolulu_________________ 257 2
33-107 San Pedro________________ 35 258 38-138 Seattle -------------------- ________ ------
38-103 Stockton__________________ 16 7 38-141 Valdez____________________ ________ ______
38-110 Newport__________________ 2 24 38-148 S1tka_____________________ 8 3
38-111 Crescent City_____________ 9 1 38-149 Portland__________________ ________ ------
38-113 Seattle-------------------- -------- ------ 38-150 Seattl--------------------- -------- ------
38-114 Tacoma___________________ 9 29
1 Gardibaldi Local men in 38-78.