The Centor Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 25, 1962

136 N.L.R.B. 1506 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

1506 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
self-organization, to form labor organizations, to join or assist
Industrial Union of Marine and Shipbuilding Workers of
America, AFL-CIO, or any labor organization, to bargain col-
lectively through representatives of their own choosing, or to
engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bar-
gaining or other mutual aid or protection, or to refrain from any
or all such activities, except as permitted by Section 8(a) (3) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as modified by the Labor-
Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959.
All of our employees are free to become or remain members of any
labor organization.
BETHLEHEM STEEL COMPANY
(SHIPBUILDING DIVISION),
Employer.
Dated---------------- By-------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 days from the date hereof,
and must not be altered , defaced, or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional
Office, 5th Floor, Squibb Building, 745 Fifth Avenue, New York 22,
New York, Telephone Number Plaza 1-5500, if they have any question
concerning this notice or compliance with its provisions.
The Centor Company ' and District 50, United Mine Workers of
America, Petitioner. Case No. 13-RC-8259. April 25, 1962
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Richard P. Gethner,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in this case to a three-member panel [Chair-
man McCulloch and Members Leedom and Brown].
Upon the entire record in this case the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The Petitioner seeks to represent the landing employees a em-
ployed at the Employer's Joliet, Illinois, operation. The Employer
contends that all the employees sought are guards within the mean-
i The Employer 's name appears as amended at the hearing.
R These employees are referred to in the record both as "landing men" and as "watchmen."
136 NLRB No. 139.
THE CENTOR COMPANY 1507
ing of the Act, and that, as the Petitioner admits to membership em-
ployees other than guards, it is therefore precluded by Section 9 (b)
(3) of the Act from certification as the representative of the proposed
unit. The Petitioner concedes that it represents employees other than
guards, but maintains that the employees in question do not perform
guard duties, and that it is, therefore, not disqualified from repre-
senting them.
The Employer is a totally owned subsidiary of two barge com-
panies and was organized to provide landing services for their barges
on the Illinois waterway. The Employer has seven employees who
maintain a 24-hour service at the two landings, located across the
waterway from each other and utilized by the Employer. Each of
these employees normally works alone during an 8-hour shift or
"watch."
These employees are required to direct customers' towboats, which
come to the landings, where to leave or take barges, assist in locating
specific barges by using diagrams which they prepare of the barge
fleet, help tie and untie barges, and make sure that the ropes required
for this work are left with the barges. They insure that the fleet of
barges at the landing is securely moored, adjusting lines and, if
necessary, replacing and splicing those which are defective. They
are also required to record or "log" the time that the towboats arrive
and leave, and the number of barges left at, or taken from, the
landings. Although the Employer does not expect these employees to
make regular rounds of the area, they usually make about two tours
of the barges during each shift to check the moorings and, if neces-
sary, to put out or take in the warning lanterns required by Coast
Guard regulations. When not performing these duties, which take
about half their time, these employees remain in the shack at each
landing area where they listen to towboat radio messages and main-
tain telephone communication with the barge companies ' dispatchers.
This enables them to be prepared to assist in tying and untying oper-
ations When towboats arrive at the landing areas, which may be at any
time, day or night.
The Employer contends that the above-mentioned tasks are inci-
dental to the primary duty of these seven employees, which is to per-
form "watchman service," and that it expects them to keep trespassers
away from the barges, some of which have cargo; to report fires to the
fire department; and to report thefts and vandalism to their super-
visor, or the general manager, or directly to the police.
The record shows that these employees were instructed to, and do,
keep trespassers away from the barges, but these "trespassers" are
almost invariably children playing in the area. They were not in-
structed to, and in fact do not, request persons who say they are au-
641796-63-vol . 186-96
1508 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
thorized to be in the area to identify themeslves. Although the three
employees who. testified indicated that they would take some positive
action in the case of fire, theft, or vandalism, it was not clear what
this action would be as the situation had never arisen, and their in-
structions are apparently not specific on these matters. Finally, these
employees do not wear uniforms, distinctive clothing, or identifying
badges, are not armed, have no police powers, and are not bonded.
On the basis of the entire record, we find that the watchmen duties
of these employees are only incidental to their primary duties as land-
ing men, and that they are .not guards within the meaning of the Act?
We therefore find that the Petitioner is not precluded from represent-
ing these employees.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section
9(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. We find, in accord with a stipulation of the parties, that the
following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for
collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act :
All landing men employed by the Employer at its Joliet, Illinois,
operation, excluding professional employees, office clerical employees,
guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
3 Cities Service Refining Corporation , 121 NLRB 1091 ; see also , The Fuller Automobile
Company, 88 NLRB 1452, 1459.
The cases upon which the Employer relies in seeking to establish that these employees
are guards are distinguishable on their facts . In Augusta Chemical Co ., 124 NLRB 1021,
for example, the employees found to be guards had the duty, during some periods of time,
of guarding the gates to the plant , during which they had possession of the key to the
gates and were responsible for locking and unlocking them and for the exclusion of un-
authorized persons from the premises.
Colvert Dairy Products Company and Local Union 670, Inter-
national Union of Operating Engineers , AFL-CIO
Colvert Dairy Products Company and Local Union 670, Inter-
national Union of Operating Engineers , AFL-CIO, Petitioner.
Cases Nos. 16-CA-1532 and 16-RC-2910. April. 25, 19692
DECISION AND ORDER
On February 19,1962, Trial Examiner James S. Foley, issued his
Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the
Respondent had engaged in and is engaging in certain unfair labor
practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and
take certain affirmative action, and recommending further that the
136 NLRB No. 133.