National Labor Relations Board v. Wyandotte Transp. Co.

• Decision Date: 04 June 1947
• Docket Number: No. 10359.,10359.
• Citation: 162 F.2d 101
• Parties: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. WYANDOTTE TRANSP. CO.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

162 F.2d 101 (1947)

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. WYANDOTTE TRANSP. CO.

No. 10359.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

June 4, 1947.

Marcel Mallet-Prevost, of Washington, D. C. (Gerhard P. Van Arkel, Morris P. Glushien, A. Norman Somers, Leonard Appel and Ben Grodsky, all of Washington, D. C., on the brief), for petitioner.

Elroy O. Jones, of Detroit, Mich. (Elroy O. Jones, of Detroit, Mich. of counsel; Dykema, Jones & Wheat, of Detroit, Mich., on the brief), for respondent.

Before HICKS, SIMONS and MARTIN, Circuit Judges.

HICKS, Circuit Judge.

Petition of the National Labor Relations Board to enforce its order of April 29, 1946, directing respondent to bargain collectively with National Organization, Masters, Mates and Pilots of America, A.F.L., as the exclusive representative of the mates on its vessels. The issues are, (1) whether the first, second and third mates employed on each of respondent's four vessels, regularly sailing the Great Lakes, are "employees" within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq.; and (2) if so, whether the 12 men comprise a unit appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining. It is the Board's position that each question must be answered affirmatively.

Respondent, on the other hand, argues that the mates are licensed officers, and as executive officers of the ship do not do any manual labor, and their duties are supervisory in nature, that when on watch each is responsible for the safety of the ship and that in addition the first mate is largely responsible for the employment and discharge of unlicensed personnel and for the maintenance of the ship.

As to these duties the Board found: "The first mate is in direct charge of the hire and discharge of the unlicensed personnel, and to him the other mates make their recommendations on these subjects. In the event of incapacity or absence of a master, a mate takes over the master's position, in which he has absolute control over his ship, the cargo, and all the personnel, including the other mates, when the ship was not in port. Except for that single instance the mates have no supervisory authority over each other."

There was some evidence that a second or third mate might occasionally discharge an employee and that the first mate was usually the working boss, and that the other mates would not do anything that he thought was wrong, although on their own watches they had equal authority so far as seamen were concerned. There was evidence that although the master might issue orders directly to the other mates, he usually gave them to the first mate to be handed by him to the others.

There is no real divergence between the record and the Board's findings, except in the amount of supervision the first mate exercised over the others, but this matter is only material on the question of what is an appropriate unit.

On the first question, respondent argues further that in the 30 years it has operated ships on the Great Lakes, there has never been a period when its mates did not have free access to the top management for expression of grievances and for discussion of relations existing between licensed personnel (mates and others) and unlicensed (such as seamen). It contends that the mates have always acted directly and indirectly for management and that a need for protecting a collective bargaining right should be found before it is granted in a case like this.

Confronted with our decision in N.L.R.B. v. Packard Motor Car Co., 6 Cir., 157 F.2d 80, approving collective bargaining rights for general foremen, foremen, assistant foremen and special assignment men in the plants of the Packard Motor Car Company, respondent sets forth 11 particulars wherein the situation of the mates in this case...