# Appendix — National Labor Relations Board v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385006_1534%3A04 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Appendix - **Published:** January 1, 1980 - **Citation:** 444 U.S. 1042 ## Text Iu the Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1979 No. 79-1082 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner —Y,—— INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION, AFL-CIO AND CouNCIL oF NorTH ATLANTIC SHIPPING ASSOCIATIONS, ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT PETITION FOR CERTIORARI FILED JANUARY 10, 1980 CERTIORARI GRANTED JANUARY 21, 1980 Iu the Supreme Court of the United States OCTOBER TERM, 1979 No. 79-1082 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner — INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION, AFL-CIO AND CoUNCIL oF NorTH ATLANTIC SHIPPING ASSOCIATIONS, ET AL. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT INDEX Page Chronological List of Relevant Docket Entries in Case Nos. ce ne ERENT Ril oa Wee Se a Ie 1 Chronological List of Relevant Docket Entries in Case Nos. BESET ARCeLI an aa mD 3 Excerpts from Transcript of Proceedings in Case Nos. NE SFRREPT Ee ES a ST RS 6 Witnesses : Jack W. Mace EERE RR ae RRS RO CI a 8 ESERIES ESS Ee, EE ee ee 17 NEES CSS SC Lee a ea 2 ena 17 ETRY CSS ee CONE ON ey ae 19 Cletus E. Houff iia as snhcasihaiz teach Lcgians Seis ls ca ak 22 OASIS Toe Se 33 ii INDEX Page Excerpts from Transcript of Proceedings in Case Nos. 5-CC-791, et al_—Continued Witnesses :—Continued Myles E. Billups AEE RRS UF REE ep el Poa A EOE DBO MON 36 EES ARTS OPE rae rs eee eRe 39 EE SRST SS AR Sy Da ae Ci 41 Otis Landis ER RY Ee ee EC ee SAD TT OR 42 Arthur Baker SER a ROPE TARO aT 46 PETIT AGE RL SOA LE AOORD TO EET A 48 a a 49 a eR ERS ALL RR ROTA OI fae pe NSN tye I 50 John Everett IE ae ALIS RRC Bt EO CMA ee PDR Soo 50 RN a ah as eekly na oad ip Dass plenitude cendulibaummmantichc 54 SNE SEIS ANCESTOR aT REET OS EI 56 Edward G. Bochert ee cuniidaneaite, 56 RESERPINE NEES RN SN 65 NE hia ch ssa acendacenlecin 65 Robert W. McCleskey i a a aa ee 67 a a 72 M. L. Chadwick SE ER ea tN oa Se ne oT er 72 ES PEER TREES SSMSL eS ae REET ERS See, 74 NER ALN TERS ARN RC OTL S COE 75 Allie S. McNeil RN AER SEY CM eRe ACen Es Lr 76 ANS ORNS ESPs Oe OER Se ae Nee ne 86 SESS ERIE AER ISA aL RS eR TR aR 87 George L. Maier NER EEE RISE A OMOF ERAS SLE MODIS MM ce 88 EE OE SSSA Re nO Oa IRE CMT ENE SOE 91 SARS OE ORE Rod ea va RIMES Ri aie 106 RESINS NRPS a ai vas SRD PR OA VA ere TREE 106 - as “ ‘ INDEX iii Page Excerpts from Transcript of Proceedings in Case Nos. 5-CC-791, et al—Continued Witnesses :—Continued Capt. John M. Haynes | __ ORA RRS SE ILO OREN TIEN Be CAR ae A) 108 I ie ectnstaht ices andl Rp scceneasssncnlniapeidesioteisamighlettaiaedl 125 fg SRE REELED TRIEKERO Fe Aree ere lnc ser 126 CPR ee ee OO EDA RIO ee NPT OL SNe a 132 SII secicdidsdsosesntgciguibtiieninssnicbincidbidcetaien ates areca ee 133 James J. Dickman i OR ROT LOTS STEER TL OMY Li ROI 134 I siete cbaaplbleaicctacionkcncaicns aieccoadaatiecba ebee 142 Thomas W. Gleason, Sr. IEE wiiedeinss Neshdssicisslesitonsinscb Maeetekbanabiincli taeda Aetna 149 OER Se, OR OM Gs ONES OUP Vl ALES BOB, ON 152 Richard Hughes Geers Nae ORMONN Diese OM nM ma sinas Oo 8 VAC a 159 NE aR OR ER Nn fe RO OT EM NE Ne 161 gt PN ee Ee 164 Alvah J. Merritt ION A tirsctes sinaeathccietanelindasacnasensigaeiibta ieee eat here 168 RI snacsala-ciniitus nasaintelesSiiiciuaencn aekihcs -oeae bala Ri saa 171 Be I iste ihde nck snneitteasunles reso zaickc bcdaatn ema 173 Excerpts from Transcript of Proceedings in Joint Exhibit 1 in Case Nos. 5-CC-791, et al. Witnesses : Jack W. Mace MINI Naps dia Siiedhnsdichdnhesubebbidedcanaietanciandaiieusiaeded cee 176 INA Ascsickd inchoceadaninersanccanctebi ee eer Tee 179 r,t MASI ACHAT NAIR LUE OLDE A BO 181 Cletus E. Houff ee gE oN CRIA CREA GEN INS AN 182 SNE is iach alain cacdicnaigac pads ciatbinaainnsue mee 188 Edward G. Bochert I ei haictincka a ebsoniccis ook keane ean 190 CI ges pccctgcoakn oul Sacshtsenaain Seed ee ee 199 \ iv INDEX INDEX v Page Page Excerpts from Transcript of Proceedings in Joint Exhibit 1 General Counsel’s Exhibits—Continued in Case Nos. 5-CC-79, et al—Continued Bet gs cite anos Maun tk oy Sipe is 1 344 Witnesses :—Continued SERRE ARCA RSI WC Ae TIRAIIRL 4 WL eRe b NT bce oe 345 A. S. McNeil Gea ULES AA GIR GRRE RMON MER nee CAME Ny 347 RO isiich aia etieninncainisinsnbl ice barttiandeis Sistine ts 203 OP ire ei ka A ft 374 a EAN LE TOI ETRE SPR TT. 207 > © SERS ACER D Pe octet ed etal te SOT OURS Ci etek 396 Myles E. Billups __ SO SRERE SANE Ol RGU rae ROME I Se wis eT, 398 ng ES ERE MEE IDD, PAE SEARS 209 | EES. ACTA ADSI eS 400 acne onauenmemCmnCnr ets 5 sr ea Sra METRES os RNs TES EL mE ES 401 — Merritt BEN MET ERAN gee OR DDE Se eee 408 oe | 1B 404 General Counsel’s Exhibits “ ; EN: Sr PENT BEE er et 407 2 (title page; pages 10; 62-68; and 71-72)... 235 he "EER & Ge eee ae Sr tee ae 3 (title page; pages 10-11; 64-68; and 69) 0... 243 1 (pages 722a thru 4th paragraph at 731a) : Short Form 4 (title page; pages 9-10; and 64-76) 00 251 through Bill of Lading (755a-756a) ......... 421 Te ruc naman niiaaeielins shen diuticedshinabanasvelinkdaselicadeuie 264 ec eorn Se Man Foote Mins REET AONE PETA NSD Ae a CARER 443 11 (title page; pages 2-7) nnn cecacecesseesnceseecesseesteseees 270 4 (Ltr. dated 9/25/74; Cases No. 14-74)... 4538 13 (title page; pages 5-14) occ eececceccceeneenecneenesseeeeeee 277 (Ltr. dated 2/8/78; Case No. 11-72)... 454 TI oar nienor int satnedtshenponines tiipetesitie sites don olsaswsidengsiglaipnsd eile aia 287 ae (Ltr. dated 6/26/73; Container Mo. 21-73)... 455 I ~sinenvacinienesrcstsioesabisen srvisisalicsiabsninasden cig atau veanviaalaaaileceds 289 | (Ltr. dated 10/3/72; Case No. 12-72) 457 BE saciid ssccesciaasinsintiealesgpataalticeonlatcesniuenee nae ne 298 . (Ltr. dated 11/29/72; Case No. 20-72)... 459 sin sintcatnbesiccghs oposite ana a aden 302 | (Ltr. dated 5/22/70; Case No. 4-70)... 460 NTE WANN ART TS IRE LD SU BOMOTAROAY Mc 303 | (Undated Itr.; Case No. 8-69) 461 BD cine cennnnreensinesaneipintniotniniaonsrsniantnaanteerwisiidenhaseiplepiaataaseed 305 (Ltr. dated 12/19/69; Container Case 8-69)... 462: IO anesnssichapnstcinnncnananilens coding 517 Q There was no other compensating factor? A No, sir. It’s an item in the tariff. [330] Either it qualifies or it does not. Q So you as a consolidator were able to obtain FAK by doing the loading and unloading? A Yes. Q Now, you expressed familiarity with the FAK rate in the Seatrain tariff. Are you personally familiar with how that FAK rate was derived? MR. PORTNOY: Objection. What difference does it make? JUDGE JALETTE: Objection sustained. MR. EISENSTADT: Your Honor, consolidators were using a certain rate. There must have been some basis for it. I think we have a right to find out what it was. JUDGE JALETTE: What difference does it make how it was derived? MR. EISENSTADT: The FAK rate takes into con- sideration certain things. The witness just testified that he has to load and un- load it. That was a consideration for obtaining the FAK. It should be obvious then that the ability of the consolidators to find was directly related to the ability to get an FAK rate or an A.W. rate or some rate that enabled them [331] to be competitive to establish a tradition. MR. PORTNOY: has no bearing on the issue of whether or not their customers are subcontractors. MR. EISENSTADT: I am not even talking— MR. PORTNOY: I don’t think it is in dispute that the FAK rate is opened to anybody who qualifies under the ocean tariff. I don’t think there is any dispute— JUDGE JALETTE: You are getting away—he’s indi- cated that he gets the FAK rate and he gets it because he can unload the container. How they arrive at the FAK rate, which was your last question, seems to me to be irrelevant. 518 MR. CARUSO: The FAK rate presumably was a creature of the steamship carrier. The steamship carrier developed the rate. If the steamship carrier developed the rate and the rate was lower than other rates because the physical handling of the container—of the contents of the con- tainer was going to be done off pier, then it would seem to me that this in effect was a conscious decision by the steamship carrier to offer this rate, thereby giving an in- ducement to have the contents of the container stuffed off pier, saving the steamship carrier the cost of him doing it on the pier. [332][ In effect the steamship carrier is subcontracting the loading and unloading of that container off pier. You don’t have— JUDGE JALETTE: I am not persuaded. I understand your position. I don’t agree with it. MR. EISENSTADT: Your Honor, ai this point, since we are concluded from examining the witness at this point, I would like to make an offer of proof. That if counsel were permitted to examine the witness, if counsel were permitted to develop the evidence in this area, it would show that the FAK rate was developed at a point in time which was consonant with the development of containerization. That the handling of less than container loads which the ocean carriers found either burdensome or uneconom- ical, propelled them to develop a rate called an FAK rate, which induced and solicited the interest of off-pier—of persons to develop off-pier facilities and off-pier arrange- ments such as in this case Dolphin, San Juan and other off-pier consolidators, and which develop the so-called tradition of the off-pier consolidator as a direct or in- direct conscious action of the ocean carriers who are members of NYSA. [3385] Q (By Mr. Kisenstadt) Mr. Lee, when you ar- ranged for the pick-up of cargo destined to be trans- ported by ocean-going vessel from a manufacturer or 519 other so-called customer, ! believe you indicated that the customer would use his own—make his own arrangements to get it to your facility, your agent’s facility, is that correct? A To the end of the question. You said that we arrange, we do not arrange for them, no. Q But it would call then, nevertheless, for the cus- tomer to take care of that aspect of the movement, is that correct? A The customer would call his carrier, yes. Q All right. ee - 5d [341] Now, in order to get this matter straightened out, let’s take this whole process step by step from the point where you learn from customers that shipments are going to, let us, Passaic warehouses. At that point you need a container, is that right? A Yes, we need a container. Q Okay. How do you go about obtaining that container? A All right. Passaic terminal warehouse could have the equipment in possession at its warehouse. Q When you say equipment, could you be more spe- cific? A Trailers. Trailer containers. Q How would it have gotten there? A Shipment has been imported— J upGe JALETTE: Let’s assume it doesn’t have any. t’s start fresh. [342] A _ All right. It then runs to the facility of the shipping company as to whether they locate a pool of their location, trailers, containers, drawing that equipment on the permit of the booking number. Q Now, stop there and go back a bit. Who arranges for obtaining the container? A The agent. Q What agent? A Passaic Terminal Warehouse. 520 Q You tell Passaic that a container is needed, is that how you do it? A No. They know they need one. Automatically? Yes. Do they obtain the container? Yes. Over your name? Yes. All right. As our agent. How do they do this? They dispatch their tractor— JUDGE JALETTE: That’s the physical way. [343] We don’t care about the physical way they do it. Q We know they have to bring it there. What procedures do they go by? What papers have to be drawn, what telephone calls, if any, have to be made? How do they go about it step by step, within your knowledge? A They have been given the booking number. Q By whom? _A_ They could get it themselves, by calling up the ship- ping company. Q What does that booking number consist of? What does it represent? A It’s a series of numbers which has meaning to the steamship company that it covers one or more containers, trailers, which go aboard a certain vessel. Q Mr. McHugh testified yesterday, if I recall cor- rectly, that the booking number meant two things to him, one thing it meant getting a container. The other thing it meant that there was going to be a place aboard a vessel. Does that mean the same thing to you? A Yes. Q Could you conceive of a booking number meaning only obtaining the container but not having a place to board a [344] vessel? A No, sir. PO PO PO PO PO ~ 521 Q Well, in your experience have you ever had that happen to you, that a booking number is given but you didn’t have a place to board a vessel? A Yes. We have missed some sailings. Q You missed the sailings. Had you been on time you would have been aboard the vessel? A Yes, sir. Q_ All right. We have the booking number. You don’t obtain the booking number, your employee does necessarily obtain that booking number, is that right? A Not necessarily. Q So, Passaic gets a booking number. Then what does it do? A It knows it needs equipment because it is receiving cargo consigned to move via Dolphin to Puerto Rico. It could be a Monday. It could be a Tuesday. He knows from momentum how much equipment, trail- ers he is going to need. He has a booking number. [845] There has been an estimate that’s made as to how many trailers will be needed to service the flow of cargo in a given week. Q He will have to get that from you, won’t he? A Unless he has called and got it himself. Q From your customers? A No. From the steamship company. Q@ How does he know how much cargo is coming in? That’s what I meant. A That’s what transportation is all about. We do know based upon performance in the past. Q He knows so many shoes are going to be coming in because every week a certain number of shoes come in, is that what you mean? A That’s an example. 522 Q Now he has got a booking—he knows the cargo is coming in. And a booking number is obtained. What happens then? A A driver is dispatched. He is given that booking number. He goes to the— Q Just before that point. Under what authority does he obtain that container? [346] I mean, does the container just willy-nilly go to anybody that requested a booking number? A Not without the booking number. Q What entitles him to a booking number? A A need, you request it and it is given to you. Q If I called down to Seatrain or Sealand they are going to give a booking number? They don’t know? A If they— Q They would give me their container, they will give me maybe even a chassis with it just because I call for it? A Yes, sir. Q Without security, without anything? A That’s right. They won’t give it to you without security, but they will give it to a carrier— Why? A (Continuing)—who has an agreement on inter- change of equipment. An equipment interchange agreement that the motor carrier has. Q What is this interchange agreement consist of, as far as you know? A Yes. This depends upon what has been negotiated between the steamship company and the specific motor carrier. [347] It does vary. But in general it is for a small activity on a one for one basis, which we refer to, they will say, as the carrier has already furnished services to show that it qualifies to protect the equipment containers in the event it is damaged while it is in their care and custody. 523 And the interchange agreement form is endorsed by both the driver and the dispatcher on the pier, and there is outlines as to what equipment looks like, what marks, a hole here, a dent there, a slash in his tire. Q Is there a master interchange agreement that covers the ongoing relationship between the carrier and the— I am talking about the ocean carrier and the motor car- rier? A_ I wouldn’t know that, sir. Q So, each time he goes down he gets a—they sign these slips and the equipment is transferred to the carrier, is that right? A Yes, sir. Q. All right. Now, as I understand it, you don’t have any trailers, is that right? A Yes, sir, we do not. Q You do— A Yes, sir, we do not. Q Okay. [848] Are you party to any interchange agreements? A No, sir. Q With any carrier, any ocean carrier? A With no carrier, period. Q_ All right. Now, Passaic has obtained a container. What does it do? What does it do with the container? A It places it at the facility and commences to load ~ our cargo. Q Now, under that interchange agreement it entitles or gives the motor carrier, whether it is an independent or whether it’s a subsidiary of Passaic or son, gives them the right to take that container and move it away from the pier, right? A Yes, sir. Q Does your name figure in this at all? A Yes, sir. It is our booking number. Q Your booking number? A Yes, sir. 524 @ You mean that when Passaic calls in to Seatrain or _ Sealand or triple L, whoever it might be, that booking number is not given in Passaic’s name? A That’s right, it’s not. It’s Dolphin’s name. [349] Q He says I want a container, booking number for Dolphin, is that how he does it? A Right. Q But Dolphin never gets that container? A That’s correct. Q Because Dolphin has no equipment, has no inter- change agreement? A That’s correct. Q Now, when he gets back to the warehouse it is handled by, in this case, Passaic, right? A Yes, sir. Q Passaic’s employees get the cargo in position and they stuff the container, right? A Yes, sir. ors | Q Now, they put a seal on that container, is that right? A Yes. Q Whose seal is put on that container? A Could be their own. Q Well, a seal is a very special device, isn’t it? A Yes, it is. Q What does it signify? What does it— A It gives— Q (Continuing)—mean? [350] A First of all, it gives a series of numbers and they are a series. It could be 1077, 1078, 1079. And if they have purchased the seals with the imprint- ing of their own name, they could have PTW, 1770, PTW— Q Would it say ever DOL 1770? A No, we have none. Q You have no seals? A No, sir. 525 Q Somebody looking at that container would see the Seatrain logo, they would look at the seal, the PTW seal? A A seal, anyway. Q Or a seal. But what—that seal number is given by whom? Where do they get the seals? A Most carriers have these on a ring so that the next one in sequence comes off. It is their ring. If it is their series of seals, and they apply this to the doors on the trailer containers. | JUDGE JALETTE: These are the common carriers? THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. MR. EISENSTADT: I didn’t hear that. JUDGE JALETTE: Common carriers. [351] Q The common carriers have the seals? . A Yes. Anybody can buy seals. You could buy some with your name on. There are companies that are in business— Q There are also seals without any designation on it except numbers? A Just numbers, that’s right. True. Q Just numbers. Now, the container is then transported down to the pier by whom? A By the trucking company. In this case, not necessarily, but it could be PTW that did the trucking. They have a trucking division, public warehouse— Q It’s a subsidiary? A It’s a subsidiary, yes. Q And they take it down to the pier, the bill of lading with the manifest? A Not necessarily. Q Not necessarily a manifest? A They might just go in with a dock receipt for the purpose of lodging the equipment and—lodging the con- tainer and getting a receipt for it. 526 Q_ All right. [352] That receipt is given to him? A To the receivers on the pier. Q_ All right. But do the receivers on the pier sign anything? A Yes. Q Do they acknowledge receipt? A Yes. One copy is retained by the driver. Q And that dock receipt signifies what, that they have obtained a container from Dolphin? A Yes. Q Not from PTW, but from Dolphin? A That’s right. * * * * [403] VICTOR SANTOS, having been first duly sworn by Judge Jalette, was ex- amined and testified as follows: JUDGE JALETTE: Be seated, please. Give your name and address to the reporter. THE WITNESS: My name is Victor Santos. I live in 247 Montclaire Avenue, Newark, New Jersey. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. PORTNOY: Q Mr. Santos, what is your occupation? A My occupation is the regional managing of San Juan Freight Forwarders, Transportation Company. Q And when were you first employed by San Juan? A ‘The year 1978, sir. Q And where was your first place of employment? A In Puerto Rico, sir. r ee Q And after you were first employed did you sub- sequently move to New York? A That’s correct, sir. Q And about when did you move to New York? A Early part of 1974. 527 Q And would you tell us what business San Juan is engaged in? A San Juan Freight Forwarders is engaged in the NVO [404] sea business which is a non vessel operated carrier. Q And where is the principal office of San Juan located? A The headquarters office of San Juan Freight For- warders are located in Carolina, Puerto Rico. Q And does San Juan also have an office in New York? A » Yes, sir. Q And that is located at 601 West 28th Street? A That’s correct, sir. Q When you first came to the New York office, could you tell us what groups of individuals San Juan em- ployed in New York? A In New York at that time we employed personnel, three, which is clerical administration. Q And any sales personnel there? A When I moved to New York I became one of the— involved in sales also. Now, could you describe how San Juan, prior to September 1, 1974, move containers, what functions it performed? A Well— JUDGE JALETTE: Before what date? MR. PORTNOY: September 1, 1974. A They were using the facilities of different carriers like TransAmerican Trailer Transport, TTT, [405] Sea- land and in very few occasions Seatrain. Q Okay. Those are the ocean carriers. And you utilized containers in your business, is that correct? A Containers or trailers. Q Okay. Who stuffed those containers? A We use the company stevedoring called Penn In- dustries. 528 Q Do you know whether Penn Industries had a union contract with any labor organization? A Yes, sir. Q With what labor organization? MR. EISENSTADT: Objection. JUDGE JALETTE: Overruled. A The union labor organization that represents Penn Industries is ILA, offshore. Q After the container was obtained by the carrier and it was stuffed by the employees of Penn Industries,— withdraw that. What was the arrangement between San Juan and Penn Industries with respect to the stuffing of containers? A Penn Industries will receive, sign for and load into containers or trailers all the merchandise shipped by ship- pers at different locations in the United States to [406] the terminal of San Juan Freight Forwarders. * * * * Q When the containers were stuffed at 601 West 28th Street, what happened to the containers afterwards? A They were documented by San Juan Forwarders and moved by a common motor carrier to the facilities of the ocean carrier. Q And what happened to them there? , A At the facilities of the ocean carrier they were put on the vessel to be transported to Puerto Rico. [407] Q Now, before they were lifted aboard the ves- sel, were the trailers or the containers ever unstuffed by ILA labor and restuffed into another container. A Yes, sir, they were. Q What percentage of your trailers or containers were ever—were subjected to that unstuffing and re- stuffing? A hs the best of my knowledge, at least 80%. ow— MR. EISENSTADT: Pardon me, can we have a time frame for this? Q During what period of time was this going on? A This started from ’73 to ’74., 529 JUDGE JALETTE: Through ’74? THE WITNESS: Yes. [410] Q Now, you say that you have—now, did there come a time when you could not obtain any containers from MTM or TTT? * oe * * [412] THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. At the latest part of 1974 we began having problems acquiring the availability for containers for San Juan Freight Forwarders from MTM. * * * * Did you ever have a conversation with Mr. O’Brien concerning the availability of containers? A Yes, sir, I did, many occasions. Q In the latter part of December, 1974, January, 1975, did you have a conversation with Mr. O’Brien con- cerning the availability of containers? A Yes, sir, I did. Q Can you fix the date? Can you tell us the date of that conversation or the first conversation in that regard? A The early part of January, 1975, I was informed by Mr. O’Brien that we will no longer have the availabil- ity of bookings or trailers for San Juan Freight For- warders. Q Will you tell us whether or not you called Mr. O’Brien or he called you? [413] A The beginning—I made the call, because we used to call for booking numbers. Q Okay. You made the call. Okay. Who did you call? A Icalled Mr. O’Brien. Q And what did you say to him and what did he say to you? A I requested booking for five spaces on the next available vessel. 530 And he informed me that—at that time that we could have the bookings but not the trailers. Q What did you say to him? A I asked him to explain the reason why we were not made the containers available to us. Q And what did he say? A He said I will have to see Mr. Paul Semack. Q Anything else said in this conversation? A Yes, sir. MR. EISENSTADT: Excuse me, “I will,” meaning who will have to see him, Mr. O’Brien or the witness would have to see Semack? THE WITNESS: I will have to, that Mr. Santos will have to see Mr. Semack. [414] BY MR. PORTNOY: Q Anything else said during the conversation? A He also informed me that the LTL facilities of MTM were being transferred to the Port of Elizabeth, and that Mr. Semack will explain to me further. Q And did you talk to Mr. Semack? A Yes, sir. I called— Q Hold it. Did he—was this in person or by telephone? A By telephone. Q_ And did he call you or did you call him? A I called him. Q And do you remember the approximate date of this phone call? A It was around the 10th or the 12th of January. Q All right. And what did you say to Mr. Semack and what did he say to you? A Well, I asked Mr. Semack why San Juan Freight Forwarders cannot get any more bookings. And he told me that he was being fined by the ILA, and also that the LTL facilities or MTM were being transferred to Port Elizabeth, and that we should contact the management of PRMMI in order to get any equip- ment. 531 [415] Q Did— MR. EISENSTADT: Excuse me. Equipment— THE WITNESS: What I mean by equipment is con- tainers. Q And was anything else said during this conversa- tion, do you remember? A Not that I remember, sir. Q Okay. A That I remember. Q And did you attempt to contact PRMMI at Port Elizabeth and Mr. Semack had suggested? A Yes, sir, I did. Before I did contact PRMNI, I informed my boss, Mr. Juan Santos, of the events. Then I did contact PRMMI facilities of Mr. Joel Mc- Gurr. Q Do you know what his title is, if you can tell us? A No. I don’t know. Except—I don’t know exactly his title. But I do know he was within the operation facilities. Q Okay. What did you say to Mr. McGurr and what did he say to you? JUDGE JALETTE: How do you spell McGurr, do you know? THE WITNESS: McGurr is spelled M-c-G-u-r-r. [416] Q Will you tell us what you said— A I asked Mr. McGurr if we could get any containers from PRMMI. At this time he informed me that the only way that he could move our cargo will be in an LTL basis. By this he meant, he said, that we will have to bring our containers to their LTL facilities in Port Elizabeth where they will be off-loaded by members of the ILA and loaded by members of the ILA into the PRMMI con- tainers. Q What does off-loaded mean? A It means the cargo that was in our container will have to be taken off one container and put into another container. Se ee ee en eae Bed ae EP ee EN es 532 MR. CARUSO: Your Honor, may I have a point of clarification. When this witness uses the term “our contaiher’’, is he referring to the ocean container or the trailer of a truck? JUDGE JALETTE: Let me make sure I understand. Did Mr. McGurr tell you that PRMMI would furnish a container to you provided after you loaded it you brought it to Port Elizabeth? THE WITNESS: No, sir. Mr. McGurr informed me that he will transport our cargo if we brought it in to Port Elizabeth in our con- tainers, [417] there they will be off-loaded from our con- tainers and put into their containers. JUDGE JALETTE: But you didn’t have any con- tainers. THE WITNESS: No, sir. JUDGE JALETTE: Mr. McGurr—did he know you had none? THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. MR. EISENSTADT: Your Honor, I think we are back where we started. He says from our containers into PRMMI containers. Our containers, can we get a clarification of what our —what work— JUDGE JALETTE: He didn’t have any. MR. EISENSTADT: What does “our containers”— JUDGE JALETTE: He is just repeating what was said. BY MR. PORTNOY: Q Now, would you tell us, did Mr. McGurr explain’ to you how you were supposed to get containers? A Yes, sir. Soe said we are supposed to lease them from the out- side. Q From the outside. . And did you in fact lease containers from the outside? A Yes, we did. Q From whom? A From I.W. Leasing Company in New Jersey. [418] JUDGE JALETTE: What was the name of the company? 533 THE WITNESS: I.W. Leasing. Q And could you tell us when you began leasing con- tainers from I.W. Leasing Company? A We started leasing containers from I.W. Leasing around the 27th of January, 1975. Q And what did you do with those containers that were leased from I.W. Leasing? A We brought—we load them with freight at our terminal and deliver them to LTL terminal in Port Eliza- beth belonging to PRMMI. Q What happened to them there? A They were off-loaded by ILA members and loaded into PRMMI containers. Q Were the containers that you obtained from I.W. Leasing ocean containers or some other containers? A They were actually seaworthy containers. MR. CARUSO: Sorry. Could that be repeated, the answer? JUDGE JALETTE: They were seaworthy containers. MR. CARUSO: Seaworthy. Thank you. BY MR. PORTNOY: Q And I may be repeating myself, I beg your Honor’s indulgence. [419] But, how long did you lease these containers from I.W. Leasing? A We leased them from the latest part of January to the latest part of May, 1975. Q Now, in the latter part of May, 1975, what hap- pened then? A Then we decided to start shipping out of Jackson- ville, Florida. [420] A I inquired from Mr. Schulein the reason why we were not being furnished containers. Q And what did he say? A He said that the reason why was because they were being fined by the ILA for every container that was loaded at a pier terminal by the consolidators. * * * * 534 1422] Q You testified before that you were involved in sales in New York? A That’s correct. Q And will you tell us, who did you solicit? A We solicited on prospective shippers to Puerto Rico. Q How did you go about it? A The way in which San Juan Freight Forwarders does it, we usually start it in Puerto Rico visiting the buyer, and he will request a routing via San Juan Freight Forwarders. Q Did any ocean carrier help you to generate business from your customers? A No, sir. Q Okay. [428] Did you learn at that time or thereafter where the LTL cargo came from or it eminated from? A Yes. Q Could you tell us from what locations that cargo came? A Well, it was explained to me that we will have to generate the cargo and we will have to go out and sell our services in order to obtain it. [429] Q Yes, but until the point—let’s go back. I realize the question might have been a little broad. Let’s take the time of the orientation. At that time did Mr. Juan Santos explain to you where the cargo had been coming from? MR. PORTNOY: Objection. A The same— JUDGE JALETTE: Overruled. MR. EISENSTADT: Go ahead. A It will be the same answer, sir. Q Go ahead. A Because, you know, he explained to me that it wes up. to the—to us—to the sales people to generate the cargo from different shippers. * * * * Q Was that—according to the information that was conveyed to you was that—excuse me—was the cargo 535 being solicited in the U.S. as well as in Puerto Rico generated as you put it? [430] A Solicited as you put it, sir, would be done in both places but mostly in Puerto Rico. Q I see. Where was it coming from in the U.S.? » A All over the states. Q Could you give us some locations? A Well, we had—we still have freight coming from Massachusetts, Chicago, Wisconsin, Ohio, New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Maryland, South Carolina, North Carolina, Florida, Georgia, from all those points. Q Now, cargo—let’s restrict ourselves at this point to cargo coming—the cargo that eventually goes over the docks in the Port of New York. A Yes, sir. Q Where does that cargo—from which of those loca- tions that you just mentioned or others that you might not have mentioned has cargo come that reached New York? A It actually again comes from all over the places— it depends on the shipper, which way he chooses for his land move. It could be—he can route it to New York or route it—now, at the present time the Baltimore Terminal re- ceiving station or Jacksonville or Miami receiving sta- tion. Q Let me go back over my question because I don’t [431] think it was fully understood. Cargo coming into New York could come from where? JUDGE JALETTE: He’s answered from all the states he mentioned before it may come to New York. Could it come from Massachusetts? Yes, sir. From Ohio? Yes, sir. From Chicago? Yes, sir. POPS PP 536 Q Now, how would that cargo come to you? What form, would it come by motor carrier, in a con- tainer or what form would it come? A By any motor carrier with the exception of Chicago, sir. Q Would you explain what the exception is? A The exception is the fact that we do have a re- ceiving station in Chicago. + * * * [436] Q Now, you said a short while ago that some of the containers coming in were not full. Where do these containers go? A They were in our terminal to be finished—filling it up and then they were sent to the pier as if it came from the terminal in New York. * * * * [487] JUDGE JALETTE: So it is the Penn Indus- tries that is doing your stuffing, as you described earlier? THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. * * * * [439] Q How did the LTL cargo that was loaded into containers at the premises which you described, how did it get to the—to the Erie Lackawanna building? A By motor carrier. * * * * [443] Q Mr. Santos, you mentioned that you were able to get booking numbers from the ocean carriers, I be- lieve Mr. Obrien, and from others. When you pay those booking numbers, that entitled you to obtain a container, is that right? A That’s correct. Q Did San Juan send somebody down to get those con- tainers? A My answer to this will have to be—actually San Juan would have to call a motor carrier because the fact is a motor carrier doesn’t know San Juan needs a truck. 537 But the motor carrier was—in fact, designated by the ocean carriers because they were the ones that had [444] the interchange contract with them, not us. * * * * CROSS EXAMINATION [446] Q In the course of your direct testimony, Mr. Santos, you stated that in the 1973-74 period there had been a rehandling of containers at piers—taking out of one, putting into another. Do you still stand by that testimony? A Yes. Q When did this begin, as far as you can recall? A I have no knowledge exactly when it began. Q Within your own experience? A Okay. Within my own experience—the fact that I was work- ing for San Juan Freight Forwarders, and I was in- formed of most of the happenings and events of the company, I was obviously aware of the fact that they were stripped in New York even though I was in Puerto Rico. Q When it arrived—when a container arrived in — Puerto Rico was there any manifestation of this? [447] A Yes, sir, on the bill of lading that was given to us by the steamship company in Puerto Rico stated whether the container had been transferred or not. Q When did you first see such a notation or marking on a bill of lading? A This would be in the* year 1973 when I was in Puerto Rico. Q Can you give us an approximate month? A October, November, December. Q Of 1973? A Yes, sir. Q Did this continue when you came to New York, New Jersey area? A Yes, sir. Q_ All right. And it persisted, is that right? A That’s correct. * & * as 538 [449] @Q My question is if you know it was going to be restuffed, why did it go down to the pier in con- tainers? A We—we are paying the company to do the work of loading our containers. These people are paid for all the weight that moves in our platform—in our platform. We had the facilities, so we fill up the container and send it to the pier. The reason why we didn’t take it down as an LTL is because the functions of San Juan Freight Forwarders is to consolidate. * * * - [454] Q (By Mr. Eisenstadt) Mr. Santos, what are the functions of a consolidator as far as San Juan is concerned within your knowledge? A The—our function would be to receive freight from different shippers from different points and to con- solidate it or merge it into one container and ship as one shipment. Q Now, you testified that you hired Penn Industries to perform that function, correct? A San Juan Freight Forwarders did. Q San Juan Freight Forwarders, I didn’t mean you, personally. * * * a [457] Q In addition to the stuffing of the containers what functions do you perform for your customers for handling the documentation with respect to the move- ment of the LTL merchandise? A San Juan Freight Forwarders as an NVO gives the customers in the first place which we are very proud of, sir, as the personalized service, we attend to their needs in person. Second, we give them a choice of handling the way of payment, to be either paid by the consignee or the con- signor. Third, we deal with banks in Puerto Rico. We accept the sight drafts and letters of credit. And also we perform—we can give them exactly where the freight is at within 30 minutes. 539 Q Okay. As far as the handling of documentatior. involving that goods, what do you do? A I beg your pardon, sir? Q The paper work involved, what paper work do you perform? A We issue the shipper a bill of lading. [458] Q Do you make arrangements for the delivery of the LTL to your premises or Penn’s premises here in New York? A No, sir. Q Who handles that? A That’s either done by the shipper or by—I guess— I suppose the salesman from the motor carrier that goes over there and solicits that freight. [472] Q During what period of time was San Juan dealing with MTM? A MTM? Q Yes. A San Juan dealt with MTM from the fall of 1974. Q Until? A In other words, we acquired trailers from MTM I would say September, October, November, December of 1974. Q And how long did that continue? A It continued—it lasted until the first part of January. Q Of 1975? A That’s correct, sir. [473] Q And after that point you were sent to PRMMI, is that right? A That’s correct. Q At that point in time you were told—is that cor- rect—that all LTL would be handled by PRMMI, is that right? A That’s correct. * oa * * [476] Q You mentioned there was a salesman in the— in your offices on 28th, correct? A Yes, sir. 540 You do some selling yourself, is that right? Yes, sir. PO PO By all means, sir, phone, writing, personal contact. * * * * [478] Q The sales that are resolicited by purchasers of your services that are solicited from your headquar- ters, are they directed at persons within the metropolitan New York-New Jersey area? A Not necessarily, sir. Q Where else would they be directed or are they directed? A Can you give me the original question first? Q Where do you look for customers? Where do you solicit customers? A Well, all over the United States and Puerto Rico, sir. Q But including within the 50 miles of the Port of New York? A That’s including the port, sir. Q Are these basically manufacturers? A Not necessarily, sir. Anybody that moves or ships or sails in the Puerto Rico market. JUDGE JALETTE: Manufacturers, jobbers, whole- salers? THE WITNESS: That’s correct, sir, anybody. * * * * [485] MR. CARUSO: I ask that these documents be marked as Respondent’s NYSA Exhibit 2. JUDGE JALETTE: What do they purport to be? MR. CARUSO: These purport to be six bills of lading on Sealand bills of lading forms indicating shipments by San Juan Freight Forwarders, Inc. on board Sealand vessels from the Port of New York to the Port of San Juan, Puerto Rico. These shipments took place at various times in calendar years 1973 and 1974. JUDGE JALETTE: Well, let’s mark them Respon- dent NYSA 2A through F. * * * * te How do you do the selling, by phone or in writing? . 541 [486] Q (By Mr. Caruso) I show you Respondent NYSA Exhibit 2A through F. I ask you whether you recognize them. A Can you show me the dates on here, sir? (Mr. Caruso indicates) A Right. Q I am just asking you whether you recognize the documents. A Just as a Sealand bill of lading showing the origi- nal carriers— Do you recognize them? Yes, I do. You do? Yes. Would you briefly identify them? A Identify them as being from San Juan Freight Forwarders. JUDGE JALETTE: What are they? Q What are they? A Ocean bill of ladings. Q Are these documents prepared by San Juan Freight Forwarders? MR. PORTNOY: Objection. [487] What is the relevance of this? MR. CARUSO: It goes to our deception defense, your Honor. JUDGE JALETTE: Make your offer of proof. Mr. CARUSO: I offer these exhibits into evidence, your Honor. The witness if asked to identify then would identify them as bills of lading for shipments by San Juan Freight Forwarders aboard Sealand vessels during 1973 and 1974. The witness would also testify that these documents represent all of the containers moved by San Juan Freight Forwarders on board Sealand vessels during calendar years 1973 and 1974. The witness would also testify that these bills of lading were prepared by San Juan Freight Forwarders, Inc. And the witness would further testify that on each bill of lading as reflected on each of the bills of lading, © PO pO yy” 542 the address or the origin of the container would be in- dicated at—as Chicago, Illinois. The witness would further testify that the containers to which these bills of lading relate were either fully loaded at San Juan Freight Forwarders Facility in New York or partially loaded at that facility in New York before [488] being trucked to the Sealand pier for load- ing on board ship. From this we would then show that San Juan Freight Forwarders was engaging in deceptive devices indicating that the origin of these shipments was outside the 50- mile radius of Port of New York in order to avoid cer- tain contractual provisions that were in effect in the Port of New York in the collective bargaining agree- ments between New York Shipping Association and In- ternational Longshoremen’s Association. JUDGE JALETTE: Your objection to your examina- tion is sustained and respondent Exhibits 2A through F are rejected. They may go into the rejected exhibit file. * * * * [490] Q Yet you also testified that this first occurred in October 1973, almost—more than six months after this orientation period. Can you explain how Mr. Santos knew of the stuffing and stripping if it had not been done already? A I believe my answer was during the year 1973. Q When were you first made aware of the stuffing and stripping that was occurring at the piers in the port of New York? A The fact is, you know, when you are employed in a company you go through a training program any com- pany will do that. My position in Puerto Rico was as a salesman. Later in 1973 I started being trained to be—to be- come—to come to New York. Late 1973 when I was informed of the problems that I would have to cope with in New York— Q When were you informed? A First part of 1974. 543 But by that time I was aware of the fact that in 1973, latter part of 1973, we were being rehandled at the [491] pier. And in—prior to September 1, 1974 I take it that all of the San Juan shipments were being—that were destined for Puerto Rico were being moved through the Port of New York, is that correct? A That’s correct. Q And this would be true whether the cargo within these shipments originated in Chicago or Baltimore or Ohio or where-have you? A At that time they were all moving out of the Port of New York, yes, sir. Q If a container that was fully or partially loaded at your facility within the area of the Port of New York, namely on the west side of Manhattan, West 28th Street, if that container was trucked to the pier, would the documentation that accompanied that trailer indicate San Juan’s address was 601 West 28th Street? MR. PORTNOY: Objection. JUDGE JALETTE: Sustained. MR. CARUSO: May I make an offer? JUDGE JALETTE: Yes. MR. CARUSO: I would offer that if I were per- mitted to answer that question and a series of questions thereafter, that this witness would testify that it was the practice of San Juan Freight Forwarders to indicate that all [492] shipments moved by San Juan Freight Forwarders regardless of the ocean carrier that was being used whether it was Sealand, Seatrain or TTT that all of these shipments would have been shown to have originated outside the 50-mile radius of the Port of New York, namely at San Juan’s facility in Chicago, Illinois. JUDGE JALETTE: Your offer of proof is rejected. Q Beginning in October 1973 you testified that the shipments of San Juan were being stuffed and stripped at the piers, is that right? MR. PORTNOY: Objection. He’s misquoted the witness’ testimony. JUDGE JALETTE: Restate the question. , RO PO Oa an ae Et EE ee eT OTS TO NR NLT ON ETOCS PRE EIT NTE eo er) ee 544 Q You testified beginning October of 1973 the ship- ments of San Juan Freight Forwarders were being stuffed and stripped at pier facilities by ILA longshore- men, is that right? A Yes, sir. Q What pier facilities are we referring to? A To the pier facilities of the ones I had knowledge of was the Staten Island facilities of the Port of New York. [496] Q Were you told by Mr. Santos of any conver- sations he had with TTT officials in—relating to the period May 1, 1974 to September 1, 1974? MR. PORTNOY: Objection. JUDGE JALETTE: Sustained. Q On September 1, 1974 is it a fact that the Puerto Rican Maritime Shipping Authority purchased all of the vessels and equipment of the then carriers in the Puerto Rican trade, namely Seatrain, Sealand and TTT? A Itis a known fact, sir. Q And from that date until at least March 1975 the only carrier—the only ocean carrier in the New York to Puerto Rican trade was PRMSA, is that correct? A Yes, sir. Q Were you aware that PRMSA filed a tariff be- ginning with the initiation of its service in the New York Puerto Rican trade which contained some of the pro- visions of the collective bargaining agreement between New York Shipping Association and International Long- shoremen’s Association? MR. PORTNOY: Objection. JUDGE JALETTE: Sustained. * * * * [515] JUAN SANTOS having been first duly sworn, was examined and testi- fied [516] as follows: * * * * DIRECT EXAMINATION Q What—Mr. Santos, are you an officer in San Juan Freight Forwarding, Inc.? A Yes. 545 What office do you hold? President of San Juan Freight Forwarders. . When was San Juan Freight Forwarders formed? San Juan Freight Forwarders was formed in 1972, May 1972. PO PO * * * * [522] Q In the 1972-1973 period which Mr. Victor Santos picks up, did San Juan Freight Forwarding ob- tain its containers independently or from ocean car- riers—its containers meaning containers which it had stuffed? A From ocean carriers. Q Could you identify those ocean carriers? A Yes. Transamerican Trailer Transport, called TTT, giving us the empty containers. Q All of them? A Yes, sir. Q When PRMSA—are you aware that there came a point when PRMSA was formed to handle the Puerto Rican trade, ocean-going trade? A Correct. Q Did PRMSA ever furnish containers to your firm? A No. Q Who did, what entity did? A MTM or PRMMI. Q You are aware of the relationship between PRMSA and MTM and PRMMI? A Yes, sir, they were the management group of PRMSA. Q Dol gather then that MTM and PRMMI furnished containers to San Juan? A That’s correct. 546 GENERAL COUNSEL’S EXHIBIT No. 3 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD REGION 2 Cases Nos. 2-CC-1364, 2-CE-75, 2-CC-1365 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATON and NEW YORK SHIPPING ASSOCIATION, INC. and DOLPHIN FORWARDING, INC. and SAN JUAN FREIGHT FORWARDERS, INC. STIPULATION IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned that: 1. Respondents ILA and NYSA admit the allegations contained in paragraphs 1(a) through (c), 2(a) through (e), 5, 14, 17, 18, 23(b) through (e), 24, and 25(c) of the Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Com- plaint and Notice of Hearing dated March 10, 1976 (hereinafter Complaint) and the Order Amending Com- plaint dated June 23, 1977. 2.(a) Puerto Rico Maritime Shipping Authority, hereinafter called PRMSA, is, and has been at all times material herein, an instrumentality duly organized un- der, and existing by virtue of the laws of the Common- wealth of Puerto Rico. (b) At all times material herein, PRMSA has main- tained an office and place of business at 1 World Trade Center, in the City and State of New York and in the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, where it has at all times material herein owned certain facilities and vessels which 547 carried cargo in commerce between states of the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (c) During the year 1974, which period is representa- tive of its annual operations generally, PRMSA, in the course and conduct of its operation, derived gross reve- nues therefrom in excess of $500,000, of which in excess of $50,000 was derived from its operations referred to above in subparagraph 2(b). (d) At all times material herein PRMSA has been a member of NYSA. (e) At all times material herein PRMSA has been a person engaged in commerce and in an industry af- fecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 2(1), (6) and (7) and 8(b) (4) (B) and 8(e) of the Act. 3.(a) Maritime Transportation Management, Inc., of Puerto Rico, hereinafter called MTM is, and has been at all times material herein, a corporation with its prin- cipal office and place of busines at 358 St. Marks Place, Staten Island, in the City and State of New York, and at Pier C, New Port Development area, Puerto Rico, where it is, and has at all times material herein continuously managed and operated vessels owned by PRMSA in the Puerto Rican maritime trade pursuant to a contract be- tween them. (b) During the year 1974, which period is repre- sentative of its annual operations generally, MTM, in the course and conduct of its operations, derived gross revenues therefrom in excess of $500,000, of which in excess of $50,000 was derived from. its operations in interestate commerce directly from the State of New York to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (c) At all times material herein, MTM has been a member of NYSA. 4.(a) Transamerican Trailer Transport, Inc., herein- after called TTT, is, and has been at all times material herein, a corporation with its principal office and place of business at 358 St. Marks Place, Staten Island, in the City and State of New York, and at Pier C, New Port Development area, Puerto Rico Nueyo, in the Com- monwealth of Puerto Rico where it is and has been at all times material herein, continuously engaged in business as a cargo carrier in commerce between States of the United States and foreign countries. PE ISR ET TOO RN, So RE een ene ee 548 (b) During the year 1974, which period is representa- tive of its annual operations generally, TTT, in the course and conduct of its operations, derived gross revenues therefrom in excess of $50,000, for the transportation of cargo directly in interstate and foreign commerce. (c) At all times material herein, TTT has been a member of NYSA. 5.(a) Puerto Rico Marine Management, Inc., herein- after called PRMMI, is, and has been at all times ma- terial herein, a corporation duly organized under, and existing by virtue of, the laws of the State of Delaware. (b) At all times material herein, PRMMI has main- tained its principal office and place of business at Fleet & Corbin Streets, P.O. Box 1910, in the City of Elizabeth, and State of New Jersey, where it is, and has at all times material herein, continuously managed and oper- ated vessels owned by PRMSA in the Puerto Rican maritime trade pursuant to a contract between them. (c) During the year 1974, which period is representa- tive of its annual operations generally, PRMMI, in the course and conduct of its operations, derived gross reve- nues therefrom in excess of $500,000, of which in excess of $50,000 was derived from its operations in interstate commerce directly from the State of New York to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 5.(d) At all times material herein, PRMMI has been a member of NYSA. 6.(a) Dolphin is, and has been at all times material herein, a corporation duly organized under, and existing by virtue of, the laws of the State of Massachusetts. (b) At all times material herein, Dolphin has main- tained its principal office and place of business at One Mayflower Drive, in the City of Hanover, and State of Massachusetts, where it is, and has been at all times material herein, continuously engaged in providing serv- ices for its customers as a non-vessel operating common carrier, hereinafter NVO, utilizing containers for effect- ing shipments thereof by ocean going vessels, and clas- sified as such by the Federal Maritime Commission, hereinafter FMC. 549 (c) During the year 1974, which period is representa- tive of its annual operations generally, Dolphin, in the course and conduct of its operations, derived gross revenues therefrom in excess of $500,000, of which in excess of $50,000 was derived from shipments in inter- state commerce directly from various states of the United States to the Commonwealth of Fuerto Rico. 7.(a) San Juan is, and has been at all times material herein, a corporation duly organized under, and existing by virtue of, the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. (b) At all times material herein, San Juan has main- tained its principal office and place of business at 601 West 28th Street, in the City and State of New York, where it is, and has been at all times material herein, continuously engaged in providing services for its cus- tomers as an NVO utilizing containers from effecting shipments thereof by ocean going vessels and classified as such by the FMC. (c) During the year 1974, which period is repre- sentative of its annual operations generally, San Juan, in the course and conduct of its operations, derived gross revenues therefrom in excess of $500,000, of which in excess of $50,000 was derived from shipments in inter- state commerce directly from various states of the United States to the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 8.(a) Penn Industries, Incorporated, hereinafter called Penn, is and has been at all times material herein, a corporation duly organized under, and existing by virtue of the laws of the State of New York. (b) At all times material herein, Penn has maintained its principal office and place of business at 186 East 57th Street, in the City and State of New York, where it is, and has been at all times material herein, continuously engaged in the business of leading and discharging (un- loading) containers for nonvessel common carriers. (c) During the year 1974, which period is representa- tive of its annual operations generally, Penn, in the course and conduct of its operations within the State of New York, derived gross revenues therefrom in excess of $100,000 for services which were performed pursuant to contract and arrangements with, and as agent for various interstate common carriers including, inter alia, 550 San Juan, which operated between and among various states of the United States and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. 9. MTM, PRMMI, TTT, San Juan, Dolphin and Penn are, and have been at all times material herein, persons and employers engaged in commerce and in an industry affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 2(1), (2), (6) and (7) and Section 8(e) and Section 8 (b) (4) of the Act. 10. Annexed hereto and made a part of this Stipula- tion are letters from the Fund to TTT described in paragraph 24(a) of the Complaint, which letters have been marked Exhibits A through E. They shall be ad- mitted in evidence. 11. Annexed hereto and made a part of this Stipula- tion are minutes of a meeting of the Contract Board dated July 10, 1975 relating to the fines and assessments described in paragraphs 24(a) and (b) of the Complaint, which minutes have been marked Exhibit F. It shall be admitted in evidence. 12. Annexed hereto and made a part of this Stipula- tion is a letter from MTM to Dolphin dated February 21, 1975 described in paragraph 25(d) of the Complaint, which has been marked Exhibit G. It shall be admitted in evidence. 13. Annexed hereto and made a part of this Stipula- tion is an invoice from Dolphin dated August 29, 1975 described in paragraph 25(e) of the Complaint, which invoice has been marked Exhibit H. It shall be admitted in evidence. 14. Annexed hereto and made a part of this Stipula- tion is an agreement betwen ILA and CONASA dated June 21, 1974, (hereinafter referred to as the yellow agreement) which agreement has been marked Exhibit I. It shall be admitted in evidence. 15. Annexed hereto and made a part of this Stipula- tion is an agreement between ILA and CONASA dated May 30, 1975 (hereinafter referred to as the blue agree- ment) described in paragraph 20 of the Complaint, which agreement has been marked Exhibit J. It shall be ad- mitted in evidence. 16. Annexed hereto and made a part of this Stipula- tion are the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law 551 dated September 18, 195 and an Order dated Septem- ber 18, 1975 in 75 Civ. 4027, by Judge MacMahon of the United States District Court for the Southern Dis- trict of New York, which are marked Exhibits K and L respectively. They shall be admitted in evidence. 17. Annexed hereto and made a part of this Stipula- tion is a decision issued by Charles E. Morgan, Adrain- istrative Law Judge of the Federal Maritime Commis- sion dated October 9, 1975, which is marked Exhibit M. It shall be admitted in evidence. 18. Annexed hereto and made a part of this Stipula- tion is an agreement betwen Penn Industries, Inc. and Local 976, ILA dated January 1, 1973, which is marked Exhibit N. It shall be admitted in evidence. This Stipulation shall be part of the record in the hear- ing in this case and findings may be made on the basis of this Stipulation and the facts herein set forth. How- ever, this Stipulation is entered into without prejudice to the right of any party to object at the hearing to the admission in evidence of any document or record referred to in this Stipulation on any ground other than authen- ticity and of any fact on the grounds of irrelevancy or immateriality and without prejudice to the right of any party hereto to introduce additional evidence material to the issues in this case whether or not such issues are dealt with or otherwise touched upon by the Stipulation. New York, New York ee et OR OS ee ee ee ee ee eh eee eae ee ee eee ee ee Date Counsel for the General Counsel National Labor Relations Board Se ee ee Pe RS ee ae se ee ae ee eee See COE Eee 6 6 BS So Date Counsel for New York Shipping Association, Inc. Meee International Longshoremen’s Association ae le Counsel for Dolphin Forwarding, Inc. and San Juan Freight Forwarders, Inc. 552 EXHIBIT A NYSA-ILA CONTAINER ROYALTY FUND 80 Broad Street New York, N.Y. 10004 (212) 943-2740 August 27, 1974 Transamerican Trailer Transport, Inc. 358 St. Marks Place Staten Island, New York 10301 Attention: Mr. Peter A. Holzer President Gentlemen: Please be advised that the following numbered containers were witnessed at a consolidation or a distribution sta- tion by a Fund Investigator: Container Number Place Date RTTZ 790204 Port Motor Lines August 5, 1974 125 Enterprise Ave. So. Secaucus, N.J. : RTTZ 790534 West Transfer Co. August 12, 1974 ‘Pier 79, N. R. New York, N.Y. RTTZ 790273 Colella Bros. Tkg. August 12, 1974 645 E. 13th St., New York, N.Y. RTTZ 790173 Passaic Terminal Warehouse August 12, 1974 600 Washington Avenue Carlstadt, New Jersey RTTZ 709763 San Juan Forwarding August 14, 1974 601 W. 28th St., New York, N.Y. RTTZ 790670 Colella Bros. August 19, 1974 645 E. 13th St., New York, N.Y. In accordance with the CONASA-ILA Container Rules, and the “Enforcement of Rules on Containers”, it has been determined that each of these containers constitutes a violation. Therefore, the NYSA-ILA Container Royalty 553 Fund has assessed liquidated damages against each con- tainer in the amount of $1,000.00. Please remit your check in the amount of $6,000.00 to the order of the NYSA-ILA Container Royalty Fund. Very truly yours /s/ Mary Townsend MARY TOWNSEND Executive Secretary CR ee ee ee nn eee ey ee 554 555 EXHIBIT B Fund has assessed liquidated damages against each con- tainer in the amount of $1,000.00. NYSA-ILA CONTAINER ROYALTY FUND Please remit your check in the amount of $6,000.00 to 80 Broad Street the order of the NYSA-ILA Container Royalty Fund. New York, N.Y. 10004 (212) 943-2740 Very truly yours September 10, 1974 /s/ Mary Townsend , MARY TOWNSEND Transamerican Trailer Transport, Inc. Executive Secretary 358 St. Marks Place. Staten Island, New York 10301 Attention: Mr. Peter A. Holzer President Gentlemen: Please be advised that the following numbered containers were witnessed at a consolidation or a distrbiution sta- tion by a Fund Investigator: Container Number Location Date RTTZ 301096 Passaic Terminal Warehouse August 23, 1974 600 Washington Ave. Carlstadt, N.J. RTTZ 705091 International Container Express August 23, 1974 86 Oak St. E. Rutherford, N.J. RTTZ 790155 Passaic Terminal Warehouse August 26, 1974 600 Washington St. Carlstadt, N.J. TTTZ 281168 Burgmeyer Trucking August 28, 1974 10 Water St., Jersey City, N.J. TTTZ 281044 7 “2 5 C August 28, 1974 TTTZ 281047 Passaic Terminal Whse. August 28, 1974 600 Washington Ave. Carlstadt, N.J. In accordance with the CONASA-ILA Container Rules, and the “Enforcement of Rules on Containers’, it has been determined that each of these containers constitutes a violation. Therefore, the NYSA-ILA Container Royalty 556 EXHIBIT C NYSA-ILA CONTAINER ROYALTY FUND 80 Broad Street New York, N.Y. 10004 © (212) 943-2740 September 23, 1974 Transamerican Trailer Transport, Inc. 358 St. Marks Place Staten Island, New York 10301 Attention: Mr. Peter A. Holzer President Gentlemen: Please be advised that the following numbered containers were witnessed at a consolidation or a distribution sta- tion by a Fund Investigator: Container No. Location Date TTTZ 281557 World Warehouse September 6, 1974 Bldg. #3, Bklyn. Navy Yard Brooklyn, New York TTTZ 281290 Farrara Bros. September 9, 1974 525 West 24th St. New York, New York TTTZ 281252 World Warehouse September 10, 1974 Bldg. #3, Bklyn, Navy Yard Brooklyn, New York RTTZ 790126 a * September 10, 1974 TTTZ 281465 Coella Bros. September 12, 1974 645 East 13th Street New York, New York RTTZ 281116 Passaic Terminal Whse. September 13, 1974 600 Washington Avenue Carlstadt, New Jersey RTTZ 790376 _ a September 13, 1974 TTTZ 790136 Ferrara Bros. Tkg. September 16, 1974 525 W. 24th St., New York, N.Y. RTTZ 790063 San Juan Forwarding September 18, 1974 601 W. 28th St., New York, N.Y. RTTZ 790397 World Warehouse September 19, 1974 Bldg. 3, Bklyn Navy Yard Brooklyn, N.Y. 557 In accordance with the CONASA-ILA Container Rules, and the “Enforcement of Rules on Containers”, it has been determined that each of these containers constitutes a violation. Therefore, the NYSA-ILA Container Royalty Fund has assessed liquidated damages against each con- tainer in the amount of $1,000.00. Please remit your check in the amount of $10,000.00 to the order of the NYSA-ILA Container Royalty Fund. Very truly yours /s/ Mary Townsend MARY TOWNSEND Executive Secretary 558 EXHIBIT D NYSA-ILA CONTAINER ROYALTY FUND 80 Broad Street New York, N.Y. 10004 (212) 943-2740 October 2, 1974 Transamerican Trailer Transport, Inc. 358 St. Marks Place Staten Island, New York 10301 Attention: Mr. Peter A. Holzer President Gentlemen: Please be advised that the following numbered containers were witnessed at a consolidation or a distribution sta- tion by a Fund Investigator: Container No. Location Date RTTZ 790533 Passaic Terminal Warehouse September 25, 1974 600 Washington Ave. Carlstadt, N.J. RTTZ 790401 sy * September 25, 1974 TTTZ 790198 Ferrara Bros. September 30, 1974 525 West 24th Street New York, N.Y. RTTZ 790348 Passaic Terminal Warehouse September 30, 1974 600 Washington Ave. Carlstadt, N.J. RTTZ 790008 ss * September 30, 1974 In accordance with the CONASA-ILA Container Rules, and the “Enforcement of Rules on Containers”, it has been determined that each of these containers constitutes a violation. Therefore, the NYSA-ILA Container Royalty Fund has assessed liquidated damages against each con- tainer in the amount of $1,000.00. 559 Please remit your check in the amount of $5,000.00 to the order of the NYSA-ILA Container Royalty Fund. Very truly yours, /8/ Mary Townsend MARY TOWNSEND Executive Secretary 560 EXHIBIT E NYSA-ILA CONTAINER ROYALTY FUND 80 Broad Street New York, N.Y. 10004 (212) 943-2740 October 17, 1974 Transamerican Trailer Transport, Inc. 358 St. Marks Place Staten Island, N.Y. 10301 Attention: Mr. Peter A. Holtzer President Gentlemen: Please be advised that the following numbered con- tainers were witnessed at a consolidation or a distribu- tion station by a Fund Investigator: Container No. Location Date RTTZ 790284 Dyna Trans—Shed 192 Oct. 2, 1974 Port Newark, New Jersey RTTZ 281486 Passaic Term. Whse. Oct. 2, 1974 600 Washington Ave. Carlstadt, N.J. RTTZ 790376 + . = Oct. 2, 1974 RTTZ 790052 “3 m Oct. 2, 1974 RTTZ 790218 Facility Warehouse Oct. 4, 1974 70-72 Laight Street New York, New York RTTZ 790167 Ferrara Bros. Tkg. Oct. 10, 1974 525 W. 24th Street New York, New York In accordance with the CONASA-ILA Container Rules, it has been determined that each of these containers constitutes a violation. Therefore, the NYSA-ILA Con- tainer Royalty Fund has assessed liquidated damages against each container in the amount of $1,000.00. 561 Please remit your check in the amount of $6,000.00 to the order of the NYSA-ILA Container Royalty Fund. Very truly yours, /8/ Mary Townsend MARY TOWNSEND Executive Secretary ec: Mr. Paul Semack 562 EXHIBIT F MEMORANDUM TO ALL MEMBERS OF THE NYSA-ILA CONTRACT BOARD: RE: Transamerican Trailer Transport, Inc. Hearing July 10, 1975 On Thursday, July 10, 1975, the undersigned met with Mr. Paul Semack, Senior Vice President, Trans- american Trailer Transport, Inc., to consider alleged violations of the Rules on Containers. At the start of the meeting, Mr. Semack handed over two checks—one issued by Transamerican Trailer Trans- port, Inc. in the amount of $10,000., and another issued by Maritime Transportation Management, Inc. of Puerto Rico in the amount of $4,000. covering certain contain- ers deemed to be in VIOLATION at the previous meeting held January 28, 1975. The containers covered are as follows: (Transamerican Trailer Transport Inc. Check #9555- in amount of $10,000) RTTZ 790173 RTTZ 281116 RTTZ 709763 RTTZ 790376 RTTZ 705091 RTTZ 790533 RTTZ 790155 RTTZ 790401 TTTZ 281047 RTTZ 790348 (Maritime Transportation Management, Inc. of Puerto Rico— in amount of $4,000) RTTZ 790008 RTTZ 790376 RTTZ 281486 RTTZ 790052 At the January 23, 1975 meeting several containers were placed in the HOLD category pending receipt of warehouse receipts. Mr. Nicholas informed Mr. Semacx that since the 30 day extension has long expired, these containers would have to be considered violations. At this point Mr. Semack stated that he knew nothing about a “30 day extension’’. Mr. Nicholas then proceeded to advise Mr. Semack that with respect to any items deemed to be in violation of the Rules, a company is given days in which to appeal ee ee ee ee 563 such rulings. However, Mr. Semack was further in- formed that if TTT were unable to submit any required or additional information in the 30 days, the finding of a Violation would stand since the Board had decided that no more than one 30 days extension would be given in which to submit missing documentation. Mr. Nicholas then reviewed the following items held from the January 23, 1975 and August 28, 1974 meetings (see Attachment “A’’: TTTZ 281557—HOLD TTTZ 281252—HOLD RTTZ 790126—HOLD RTTZ 790397—HOLD RTTZ 790284—VIOLATION RTTZ 796244—HOLD RTTZ 207911—HOLD *RTTZ 790057—HOLD RTTZ 790057—HOLD RTTZ 790057—HOLD RTTZ 790349—HOLD RTTZ 790007—HOLD RTTZ 790273—NO VIOLATION RTTZ 790670—NO VIOLATION TTTZ 281465—NO VIOLATION TTTZ 790136—NO VIOLATION TTTZ 790198—VIOLATION RTTZ 790167—VIOLATION With regard to the three violations noted against Containers Nos. RTTZ 790284, TTTZ 790198 and RTTZ 790167, there is no further appeal available to the carrier. With regard to the 41 containers scheduled for review today (see Attachment “B”) Mr. Semack advised that he was unable, at this time, to submit any documenta- tion thereon. Mr. Nicholas advised Mr. Semack that he would be granted 30 days in which to supply the necessary docu- mentation. If, no documentation is supplied by Au- gust 11, 1975, these containers are to be considered in Violation of the Rules and the Container Royalty Fund will expect payment on all open items. Must submit warehouse receipts within 30 days —_—“N ’ WS If TTT can submit documentation proving these were Northbound shipments—No Violation; if Southbound—Violation Nee ee Se * Three (3) separate movements. 564 NYSA-ILA ATTACHMENT “A” CONTRACT BOARD 80 Broad Street New York, N. Y. 10004 TRANSAMERICAN TRAILER TRANSPORT At the January 23, 1975 meeting with Mr. Semack, the following items were placed in the “Hold” eategory pending warehouse receipts: TTTZ 281557 World Whse. observed 9/6/74—our letter 9/23/74 Matsushita Electric—Northbound TTTZ 281252 World Whse. observed 9/10/74—our letter 9/23/74 RTTZ 790126 World Whse. observed 9/10/74—our letter 9/23/74 RTTZ 790397 World Whse. observed 9/19/74—our letter 9/23/74 RTTZ 790284 Dyna Trans—observed 10/2/74—our letter 10/17/74 Shed #192 (Question of Manufacturer’s Label which was referred to the full Board) Items held open from the August 28, 1974 meeting, reviewed at the January 23, 1975 meeting, referred to the full Board Re Manufacturer’s Label. However, Mr. Nicholas was requested to Furnish his recommendation. RTTZ 790244 Dyna Trans observed 12/10/73—our letter 2/5/74 (Domel) RTTZ 207911 Dyna Trans Co. observed 1/22/74—our letter 3/8/74 RTTZ 790057 Dyna Trans Co. observed 3/20/74—our letter 4/22/74 RTTZ 790057 Dyna Trans Co. observed 4/9/74—our letter 4/22/74 RTTZ 790057 Dyna Trans Co. observed 5/14/74—our letter 6/14/74 RTTZ 790349 Dyna Trans Co. observed 5/31/74—our letter 6/14/74 RTTZ 790007 Dyna Trans Co. observed 6/20/74—our letter 6/28/74 The following items were determined to be VIOLA- TIONS REMIT. At the January 238, 1975 meeting, the Committee concurred that they would discuss the matter further and advise Mr. Semack of their decision at an early date. However, no liquidated damages would be assessed as to past violations. RTTZ 790273-Colella Bros.-observed 8/12/74-our letter 8/27/74 RTTZ 790670-Colella Bros.-observed 8/19/74-our letter 8/27/74 RTTZ 281465-Colella Bros.-observed 9/12/74-our letter 9/23-74 TTTZ 790136-Colella Bros.-observed 9/16/74-our letter 9/23/74 TTTZ 790198-Ferrara Bros.-observed 9/39/74-our letter 10/2/74 RTTZ 790167-Ferrara Bros.-observed 10/10/74-our letter 10/17/74 ne eee ee ee ee a eee 565 EXHIBIT G MARITIME TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT, INC. OF PUERTO RICO 358 St. Marks Place, Staten Island, New York 10301 Telephone: (212) 447-2600 @ Cable: TOTEM February 21, 1975 Mr. Richard Lee Dolphin Freight Forwarding P. O. Box 76 Hanover, Massachusetts RE: Trailer RTTZ 790052 EKH Voy. 78-7 B/L 3175 ” —_ RTTZ 790348 PDL Voy. 79-9 B/L 3212 » TT TZ 281486 EKH Voy. 79-1 B/L 3175 ” — RTTZ 790376 EKH Voy. 78-7 B/L 3176 RE: Tariff FMC F No. 1 of Puerto Rico Maritime Shipping Authority Original Page 123—Tariff Rule E of Rule 440 Dear Mr. Lee: On January 23, 1975, meeting was held in the offices of the New York Shipping Association, Inc. with the Con- tract Administration Officer and other members of the NYSA/ILA Royalty Fund as concerns violations of the NYSA/ILA Rules on Containers as articulated in the current ILA Labor Contact in effect in the Port of New York. Through its Fund Investigators, subject trailers were discovered to be in violation of the Rules on Containers. As such, MTM was assessed liquidated damages of $1000 per trailer. Accordingly, I have enclosed our invoice MTM 141-75 billing Dolphin Forwarding the amount of these liqui- 566 dated damages in accordance with our tariff in effect at the time. Very truly yours, /s/ Paul Semack PAUL SEMACK PS :ph Encl. ec: Mr. E. Sheppard—Morgan, Lewis, Bockius Mr. R. Guevada—Director of Operations—PRMSA Mr. R. Lugo—President MTM Mr. M. Massaro—Revenue Auditor 567 MARITIME TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT, INC. OF PUERTO RICO 358 St. Marks Place, Staten Island, New York 10301 Telephone: (212) 447-2600 —INVOICE— No. MTM-141-75 Date: 2/21/75 Dolphin Forwarding P.O. Box 76 Hanover, Mass. Amount Total Violation of Conasa-ILA rules on containers, as per attached Puerto Rican Maritime Ship- ping Authority Tariff FMC F No. 1 Four trailer @ $1,000.00 per trailer TRL # RTTZ 790052 @ $1,000.00 $1,000.00 RTTZ 790348 @ $1,000.00 1,000.00 RTTZ 281486 @ $1,000.00 1,000.00 RTTZ 790376 @ $1,000.00 1,000.00 TOTAL $4,000.00 PAY THIS AMOUNT $4,000.00 TRANSAMERICAN TRAILER TRANSPORT, INC. JANUARY 23, 1975 List Container Our Nos. Numbers Location Letter Comments 26 RTTZ 790348 Passaic Term. Whse. 10/2/74 VIOLATION 29 RTTZ. 281486 Passaic Term. Whse. 10/17/74 VIOLATION —(Dolphin) 30 RTTZ 790376 “ ™ 58 10/17/74 VIOLATION —(Dolphin) 31 RTTZ 790052 “ 2 10/17/74 VIOLATION —(Dolphin) 568 MARITIME TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT, INC. OF PUERTO RICO 358 St. Marks Place, Staten Island, New York 10301 Telephone: (212) 447-2600) INVOICE No. MTM 595 Date: 8/29/75 Dolphin Forwarding P. O. Box 76 Hanover, Mass. To charge you for container violations per rule 8(c) of PRMSA Tariff No. 1 FMC-F No. 1 Page 124 at the rate of $1,000.00 per container as follows: Was observed at the On Container No. loading platform of: (Date) RTTZ 790179 Passaic Term. Whse. 10/16/74 RTTZ 790364 600 Washington Ave. 10/21/74 RTTZ 790662 Carlstadt, N.J. 10/21/74 RTTZ 200463 my 11/13/74 RTTZ 790446 ” 11/18/74 RTTZ 790444 “ 12/10/74 TTTZ 281088 a 11/20/74 7 containers @ $1,000.00 per container = $7,000.00 $7,000.00 Please Remit ee 569 [FILE Exec. Sec. 0] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD—REGION 2 Cases Nos. 2-CC-1364, 2-CC-1365, 2-CE-75 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION & NEW YORK SHIPPING ASSOCIATION, INC. and DOLPHIN FORWARDING, INC. and SAN JUAN FREIGHT FORWARDERS, INC. STIPULATION WHEREAS, International Longshoremen’s Associa- tion, (herein called ILA), New York Shipping Associa- tion, Inc., (herein called NYSA), Dolphin Forwarding, Inc. and San Juan Freight Forwarders, Inc. (herein called the Charging Parties), and the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board, (herein called the General Counsel), being all of the parties to this proceeding, desire to petition the National Labor Rela- tions Board, in order to effectuate the purposes of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. Section 151, et seq., (herein called the Act), and to avoid all unneces- sary costs and delay, to exercise its powers under Section 102.50 of the Rules and Regulations of the Board, Series 8, as amended, (herein called the Rules), to transfer this proceeding to the Board; and WHEREAS, pursuant to a Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing and an Order Amending Com- plaint, a hearing was held, the testimony of certain wit- 570 nesses was taken, and exhibits were introduced into evidence, and other testimony, offers of proof and ex- hibits were proffered by the ILA and NYSA and other exhibits by the General Counsel, which were rejected by the Administrative Law Judge and placed in the rejected exhibits file. NOW, THEREFORE, IT HEREBY IS STIPULATED by and between the parties herein as follows: 1. The parties hereby acknowledge receipt and due service of the Charges, the Consolidated Complaint, the Order Amending Complaint, the Notice of Hearing, the Order Extending Time to Answer, ILA’s and NYSA’s Answers and Amended Answers, and Orders Resched- uling Hearing. 2. The parties agree that the following documents constitute the entire record in these cases: (a) The Charges; (b) The Consolidated Complaint; (c) The Amended Complaint; (d) The Answers; (e) The Amended Answers (f) The Transcript of Testimony (g) The General Counsel’s Exhibits, ILA’s Ex- hibits, NYSA’s Exhibits and the Rejected Ex- hibits; (h) General Counsel’s Motion to Strike Defenses, ILA’s Opposition thereto, NYSA’s Reply to General Counsel’s Motion, and General Coun- sel’s Reply to the Opposition ; (i) NYSA’s Cross-Motion to Dismiss the Com- plaint; (j) General Counsel’s Opposition and Reply Pa- pers concerning said Motion; (k) The Administrative Law Judge’s Order grant- ing the Motion to Strike Defenses and Denying the Cross-Motion to Dismiss the Complaint; 571 (1) ILA’s and NYSA’s Motion for Special Permis- sion to Appeal the Judge’s Order Striking De- fenses and General Counsel’s Reply thereto and the Board’s Order denying Special Permission ; (m) ILA’s and NYSA’s Motion to Offer Written Testimony and General Counsel’s papers Op- posing said Motion; (n) The Judge’s Order Denying said Motion; (o) ILA’s and NYSA’s Application to take Dep- ositions and Demand for Production of Docu- ments; (p) The Denial of said Application; (q) ILA’s and NYSA’s «equest to the General Counsel Appealing the Denial of the afore- mentioned Applications and (r) The Judge’s Orders for continuation in the hearing. 3. The parties agree that they waive the making of findings of fact and conclusions of law by an Admin- istrative Law Judge and the issuance of an Administra- tive Law Judge’s Decision and Recommended Order. They desire to submit this case directly to the Board for findings of fact, rulings on Exceptions to Rulings on motions, objections and offers of proof, conclusions of law and the issuance of a Decision and Order. They further request the Board to set dates for the filing of briefs and reply briefs herein by all parties pursuant to § 102.46 of the Board’s Rules. 4. Approval of this Stipulation by the Administrative Law Judge shall constitute an Order transferring the within proceeding to the Board. By: /s/ Irwin M. Portnoy IRWIN M. PORTNOY Counsel for the General Counsel National Labor Relations Board Region 2 December 7, 1977 (Date) 572 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION By: /s/ Illegible ILLEGIBLE Dec. 5, 1977 (Date) NEW YORK SHIPPING ASSOCIATION, INC. By: /s/ Illegible ILLEGIBLE Dec. 5, 1977 (Date) DOLPHIN FORWARDING, INC. By: /s/ Thos. Dleonway THOS. DLEONWAY Wed. 7 December, 1977 (Date) oe JUAN FREIGHT FORWARDERS, NC. By: /s/ Thos. Dleonway THOS. DLEONWAY Wed. 7 December, 1977 (Date) APPROVED: /8/ Henry L. Jalette, HENRY L. JALETTE, Administrative Law Judge National Labor Relations Board December 22, 1977 (Date) eT ee 573 [FILE Judges Div. ] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DIVISION OF JUDGES WASHINGTON, D.C. Case Nos. 2-CC-1364, 2-CC-1365, 2-CE-75 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION & NEW YORK SHIPPING ASSOCIATION, INC. and DOLPHIN FORWARDING, INC. and SAN JUAN FREIGHT FORWARDERS, INC. ORDER The stipulation of the parties transferring this pro- ceeding to the Board and waiving findings of fact and conclusions of law and the issuance of a decision and recommended order by the undersigned is hereby ap- proved, and IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the proceeding be transferred to the Board. /s/ Henry L. Jalette HENRY L. JALETTE Administrative Law Judge Dated: December 22, 1977 574 New York, N.Y. [FILE See. D] UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Cases 2-CC-1364, 2-CC-1365, 2-CE-75 [FILE IN FORMAL FILE. .D.] INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION & NEW YorRK SHIPPING ASSOCIATION, INC. and DOLPHIN FORWARDING, INC. and SAN JUAN FREIGHT FORWARDERS, INC. ORDER APPROVING STIPULATION and TRANSFERRING PROCEEDING TO THE BOARD A hearing was held on July 11 and Sept. 19, 20 and 21, 1977, in the above-entitled proceeding before Admin- istrative Law Judge Henry L. Jalette of the National Labor Relations Board, at which time certain exhibits were received into evidence. Thereafter, on December A 1977, International Longshoremen’s Association; New York Shipping Association, Inc.; Dolphin Forwarding, Inc.; San Juan Freight Forwarders, Inc.; and the Gen- eral Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board entered into a Stipulation. The parties agreed that the Stipulation and the documents attached thereto consti- 575 tute the entire record in the cases. They waived the making of findings of fact and conclusions of law and the issuance of a decision by an Administrative Law Judge and desire to submit the cases directly to the Board for findings of fact, rulings on Exceptions to Rulings on motions, objections and offers of proof, con- clusions of law and the issuance of a Decision and Order. The parties requested that the Board set dates for the filing of briefs and reply briefs. On December 22, 1977, the Administrative Law Judge approved the Stipulation and by Order of same date, referred the proceeding to the Board. The Board having duly considered the matter, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Stipulation be, and it hereby is, approved and made a part of the record herein. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-entitled proceeding be, and it hereby is, transferred to and con- tinued before the Board in Washington, D.C., for the purpose of making findings of fact and conclusions of law and for the issuance of a Decision and Order. The parties herein may file briefs with the Board in Washington, D.C., on or before January 25, 1978, and may file reply briefs on or before February 8, 1978. Dated, Washington, D.C., January 4, 1978. »By direction of the Board: Associate Executive Secretary GEORGE A. LEET 576 THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DIVISION OF JUDGES WASHINGTON, D. C. Cases Nos. 2-CC-1364, 2-CC-1365, 2-CE-75 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION AND NEW YORK SHIPPING ASSOCIATION, INC. and DOLPHIN FORWARDING, INC. and SAN JUAN FREIGHT FORWARDERS, INC. ORDER On March 10, 1976, the General Counsel issued the consolidated complaint in the above-captioned case al- leging that International Longshoremen’s Association (herein referred to as Respondent ILA), and New York Shipping Association, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Respondent NYSA), had violated Section 8(e) of the Act and that Respondent ILA had violated Section 8(b) (4) (i) and (ii) (B) of the Act by maintaining and enforcing a collective-bargaining agreement containing certain rules on containers against Dolphin Forwarding, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Dolphin), the Charging Party in Cases Nos. 2-CC-1364 and 2-CE-75 and against San Juan Freight Forwarders, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as San Juan), the Charging Party in Case No. 2-CC-1365. Thereafter, Respondent ILA and Respondent NYSA timely filed answers and amended answers. The amended answers contained certain affirmative defenses and General Counsel has moved to strike such affirmative answers.' 1 All parties have filed briefs in support of their positions. Re- spondent ILA has requested deferral of ruling on General Counsel’s motion until the hearing or pending submission of further argument. The request is denied. The briefs previously filed adequately cover the issues and have been duly considered. iii aii i 577 A. The Affirmative Defenses of Respondent NYSA Respondent’s first defense is that the dispute under- lying this proceeding is a primary dispute between it and its members on the one hand and Respondent ILA on the other. Its second defense is that the contract provi- sions here complained of are valid work preservation rules. In International Longshoremen’s Association, AFL-CIO (Consolidated Express, Inc.), 221 NLRB 956 (1975), hereinafter referred to as the Cnex case, the Board rejected similar defenses. Respondent NYSA asserts, however, that the instant case presents different factual issues which require a hearing of evidence on these af- firmative defenses. As General Counsel notes, the as- sertion is contrary to the deposition of counsel in a Notice of Motion to stay proceedings in Sidney Danielson v. International Longshoremen’s Association and New York Shipping Association, Inc., U.S. D.C., Southern District of New York, Civil Action No. 75-Civ-4027, wherein the Regional Director of the Board, pursuant to the charges in this case, petitioned for an injunction pursuant to Section 10(1) of the Act. In that deposi- tion, counsel averred that “the issues in the instant action are identical to the issues raised and fully liti- gated in [Conex]. The parties to this proceeding, except for the charging parties, are identical to those in [Conex].” In Conex, the Board found that the Rules on con- tainers were not valid work preservation rules and im- plicitly rejected the defense that the underlying dispute was a primary one betwen Respondent NYSA and Re- spondent ILA. In doing so, the Board defined the work in controversy as the LCL and LTC container work per- formed by the consolidators in that case at their own off-pier premises. As such work had traditionally been performed by consolidators at their own off-pier premises, the Board rejected the work preservation defense. Its holding was affirmed in Longshoremen v. N.L.R.B., 587 F.2d 706 (2nd Cir., 1976). 578 General Counsel asserts in support of his motion that the consolidators in this case, Dolphin and San Juan, have traditionally performed the work here in question at off-pier premises, and Exhibits 3 and 4 submitted by Respondent NYSA in its reply to the motion to strike defenses support the assertion. Significantly, Respondent NYSA has not averred in its defenses of work preserva- tion that Respondent ILA has historically and tradition- ally performed the ICL and LTC work performed by Dolphin and San Juan. Thus, it appears that Respondent NYSA by its first and second defenses is seeking to relitigate the same issue which the Board decided in Conex. That such is the case is evident from Respond- ent NYSA’s assertion that a Supreme Court decision in Northeast Marine Terminal Company v. Caputo, Docket 76-444 (June 17, 1977) places in doubt the continuing validity of Conex. However, in International Longshore- men’s Association, AFL-CIO, et al. (Associated Trans- port, Inc., et al.), 231 No. 64, a majority of the Board rejected a reading of Caputo which would, in effect, re- verse Conex. To the contrary, the majority adverted to its words in Conex that “it is clear that the on-pier stripping and stuffing work performed by Longshoremen as an incident of loading and unloading ships does not embrace the work [of stuffing and stripping containers] traditionally performed by Consolidated and Twin at their own off-pier premises.” Thus, it is clear that Conex is viable precedent for this case and that while “the facts of each case in the area are paramount,” 2 the facts that require consideration relate to the work traditionally performed by the consolidators off the pier. As noted earlier, Respondent NYSA has not averred that Respondent ILA has traditionally performed the work which Dolphin and San Juan was performing which be- came the subject matter of the controversy in the instant case. For the foregoing reasons, I find merit to General Counsel’s motion to strike the first and second defenses and they are hereby stricken. International Longshoremen’s Association, AFL-CIO, et al. (As- sociated Transport, Inc., et al.), supra, slip opinion, page 8. 579 2. Third defense The third defense asserted by Respondent NYSA in its amended answer is that the charge against it is time barred under Section 10(b) of the Act. The charge against Respondent NYSA was filed by Dolphin on May 6, 1975. While the Rules on Containers “here alleged to be violative of Section 8(e) of the Act were entered into more than 6 months before the filing of Dolphin’s charge, the complaint alleges, and the an- swer admits, that on January 23, 1975, Respondent NYSA, in implementation of the Rules on Containers, by admitting agents, levied fines upon Maritime Transporta- tion Management, Inc., of Puerto Rico and Transameri- can Trailer Transport, Inc., by reason of their having furnished containers to Dolphin and San Juan. Such conduct would constitute an entering into a contract within the meaning of Section 8(e) of the Act. As it occurred less than 6 months before the filing of the charge in 2-CE-75, the affirmative defense of Section 10(b) of the Act is without merit and is hereby striken.* 3. Fourth Defense Respondent NYSA’s fourth defense is the allegation that Dolphin and San Juan have not obtained permits assertedly required by provisions of the Interstate Com- merce Act to engage in the consolidation of freight of LTL and LCL cargo and have therefore not lawfully acquired the work which is the subject of dispute herein. This defense is stricken as legally insufficient. Dolphin’s and San Juan’s qualifications to perform the work in question under the provisions of the Interstate Commerce Act is a matter extraneous to the application and en- forcement of the Act. The Board, in a proceeding of this type, must determine only whether Dolphin and San Juan are either employers or persons within the meaning of Sections 2(1) and (2) and 8(e) of the Act. 3 Respondent NYSA has also moved to dismiss the complaint on the giounds that it is barred by Section 10(b) of the Act and it is moot. The motion to dismiss is denied. 580 3. The affirmative defenses of Respondent ILA 1. First, Second, Third, and Sixth defenses These defenses of Respondent ILA are essentially the same as the first, second, third and fourth defenses of Respondent NYSA and they are hereby stricken for the reasons given above with respect to Respondent NYSA’s first, second, third, and fourth defenses. 2. Fourth defense The fourth defense asserts laches on the part of Dol- phin and San Juan in filing charges. The defense is le- gally insufficient and is hereby stricken. 3. Fifth defense This defense avers that impairment of the Rules on Containers and reaffirmation of the holding in Conex will adversely effect 25,000 longshoremen and pensioners and their families and create chaos in the industry. This defense raises matters of policy not properly addressed to the Board and is legally insufficient. It is hereby stricken. /s/ Henry L. Jalette HENRY L. JALETTE Administrative Law Judge Dated: September 12, 1977 581 FILE Judges Div. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DIVISION OF JUDGES WASHINGTON, D.C. FILE IN FORMAL FILE DP Cases Nos. 2-CC-1364, 2-CC-1365, 2-CE-75 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION AND NEW YORK SHIPPING ASSOCIATION, INC. and DOLPHIN FORWARDING, INC. and | SAN JUAN FREIGHT FORWARDERS, INC. ORDER Pursuant to agreement of the parties at hearing herein, Respondents New York Shipping Association and In- ternational Longshoremen’s Association have submitted affidavits setting forth the evidence they wished to ad- duce in defense of the allegations of the complaint herein. Such affidavits and attached exhibits have been duly considered and they are hereby rejected as the matters contained therein relate to defenses which are deemed to be legally insufficient in light of the decision of the National Labor Relations Board in International Longshoremen’s Association, AFL-CIO, (Consolidated Ex- press, Inc., and Twin Express, Inc.) 221 NLRB 956. The 582 affidavits and exhibits attached thereto shall be placed in the rejected exhibit file. As Respondent’s affidavits and exhibits have been re- jected, in accordance with the agreement of the parties, the hearing scheduled for November 7, 1977, is hereby cancelled and the hearing is closed. The parties are given until December 5, 1977, to file briefs. /s/ Henry L. Jalette HENRY L. JALETTE Administrative Law Judge Dated: November 2, 1977 583 EXHIBIT No. 1 10 DEC 74 SUBJ: Mem for Record FROM: Russ McHugh OPS MGR-DOLPHIN > Received call from Paul Semack from “Transameri- can” asking for Dick Lee. Replied that he was in PR for week. Said he had list of containers given him by ILA which were domiciled in Carlstadt. Told him that I didn’t know if I was the one to help him but would take the info. and would pass it on to RWL. Gave me the following list: 790533, 790401, 790348, 790008, 301096, 790155, 281047, 281116, 790173, 281436, 790052, 790376. Trl 301096 he then said to omit as was flatbed y didn’t apply to us. He then stated that listed con- tainers were liable to $1000. for being stuffed within 50 mile zone and that they were going to come after us legally to collect this amount as per the tariff. Also, that they would try to collect this amount for any con- tainers prior to OCT 1 as we had been showing Han- over as origin point and deceiving TTT. He then asked if Hanover was outside of 50 mile zone and i said no. He then stated all loads moving out of the Boston area was subject to being loaded by ILA. Told him I didn’t know why because no one servicing PR left out of Bos- ton. Finally stated that he was x not releasing any equipment to us, not accepting anything from us, nor would he release anything to anyone else for us. Told me to load our trailers and take them to Sealand to have them stripped, and restuffed and pay the specified charge. Stated that our freight was much too expensive for him to handle at a $1000 fine per trailer. Called RWL and explained. Discussed matters and he said he was in PR and couldn’t do anything till he got home, but to get in touch with, first, Bob W., and then Chas. Haslup at Fme: (N.B.) Cemack had called at 9:15, was now about 9:40. Talked with Bob W. who said to apply for injunction. Regarding freight under 584 load, said to either have Fram book load for themselves, consigned to us in PR, or call Semack back and explain that was OK load and would he accept. Re frt under load, Bob said to let SL strip and restuff, and to move frt out of Boston by SL. Called Haslup, who was out of town til 18th. Spoke to Don Brunner who was not quite as familiar with case. Brunner asked general questions, after I explained the situation, like: did I know of anyone else who was af- fected by this practice, how many loads had we moved by TTT, ST, SL, how many loads per week, etc. Said he would check into situation and get back. When I asked if he was familiar with Conex-Twin case and should we go same route thru NLRB, he said prob. would be best. Bob W. called saying that perhaps we should try to lodge the PTW load, TRL. RTTZ 790444 to see if it would be accepted or rejected, and see if we could also draw an MT on one of the open bookings that we have. Idea was that we would then have legal basis for court case. TLX’d RWL who said that shouldn’t go this route as issue was already at head and we had received word from officer of TTT that they were refusing our freight. This was enough segue RWL. I stated that they had not actually refused anything, at this point was a threat (promise, maybe?). RWL said no. When asked if I should advise Tom Murphy, RWL said yes, advise him, but he wasn’t guy for the job, although his NJ cohorts could probably do the work, although it would be “veddy (sic) expensive”. Called Tom and explained to him situation, then ex- plained to him the Conex case (he didn’t seem familiar with it) then had to explain to him the two divisions of PRMSA and the tariff as he seemed to want to take action against TTT group only. He asked for rundown of PRMSA, PRMM, & TMT asking for info as to whether they were public agencies or private groups and where they were organized. This info requested by TLX to RWL. 585 Prior to calling Tom had tried to reach Semack but he was unavailable. After call with Tom, Semack called back. Explained to him that Fram load TRL 298944 was on way and would he accept it. Evaded question and said that someone in our company had made bad decision long time ago. Then asked for list of numbers of TRLS in our system. Gave him 790444 and 790820 at Seaboard. His response was that we should not load them. When pressed again about the Frm load, his response was mis- leading: My query, “Well what are you gonna do about that load on the way in, you gonna accept it?” His re- ply; “Accept it? Shit, I’ll probably strip and stuff it.” With that we hung up, him knowing that we were send- ing that load in. Spoke to X Brunner again. He said the reason for our problems was a meeting held last week between the 2 management companies of PRMSA: the discussion centered around the fact(?) that TTT was not adhering to ILA rules. Conclusion was that TMT (TTT) would now adhere to those rules. He also sed that best route was to go via Conex route thru NLRB as his agency had no injunctive powers. Did wish that he was private lawyer because felt it was a strong case, and he would win. Cirea noon, But O. called y said he had received a TWX from Rebalado saying that they were to cancel all Dolphin bookings and issue no new ones. Told Bud that we had been found. But wanted to know exactly what had Semack told me y I related it to him. He said he wanted to be prepared y know what was up when he spoke to Semack. But said he would check things and wouldn’t let go of this. I thanked him and said if neces- sary we would protect him with TTT as Bud was ig- norant of our NJ operation and no recriminations should befall him due to our violations and fines TTT may have to pay because Bud booked out trls. ee ere ea eae eg Ree eo ee ee oe ey ee ee ee ee ee Pee! OS UC | 586 MEMO FOR RECORD ‘ 11 DEC 74 FROM: Russ McHugh Recollections from my first phone conversation with Semack--Semack said that Dolphin had been deceiving TTT/EMTM by showing Hanover, MA as our address. Apparently TTT construing this as origin point; perhaps this info was given to him as a result of meeting last week with both management companies. Point to consider on this if any legal action ensues is that TTT B/L only has spaces to show Shipper, Con- signee and Party to be notified. Unlike the old ST & SL B/L, there is no space to show the origin point. This - is not to say that we would not continue to show Han- over as we did in the ST days, but that alternative was Sy: even available to us due to the construction of the /L. Cirea 12:30, But O. called HA and informed him that he had to cancel all bookings for DFI and was not allowed to issue any new ones. But stated to HA that he did not know of any DFI loads stuffed in NJ and HA replied “How would you, all you gave us was a booking assuming we were moving out of our New England territory.” But is apparently quite concerned that TTT officials may think he deeply involved with DFI and could cost him a job, let alone the account. MEMO FOR RECORD FROM: Russ McHugh 13 DEC 74 Circa 11:30 AM go call from Bud O. who was re- turning my earlier call to him. Purpose of my call was to see if he had heard anything new on DFI. But said all he knew was that he had done as Rebalado had in- 587 structed him, i.e., to cancel all advance bookings for DFI. What Bud didn’t know was what was the status of prior bookings that had not been used that he had issued to us. But said only way to find that out was to check with O’Brien. Called G. O’Brien and asked about status of bookings. Gery said that we had none. I asked him if I could get a booking from him for a load. He said no, we could not get a booking and that I should talk to Semack. Said Semack was out and would not be hack until 2:30 to 3:00 today. Called Semack. Intention of my call was to see if I could get a booking for a 40’ Open top to handle Marr load. If his response was a visceral “no”, I was pre- pared to explain that it would not be LTL but TL move- ment of steel pipes loaded at customer’s dock, that cus- tomer had called ysdy looking for us to move in re- quested equipment, that only TTT could supply the equip- ment, that would be loaded outside of 50 mile Zone of NY (i.e., Boston) and on what tariff basis was his com- pany denying us the equipment. Semack not in, left my number for him to call back. At this time is 4:00 and probably will not call back. Bob W. says can’t get any bookings from Sealand people he deals with, wait until Monday. Sealand, if true to form, will deny us booking on moves ex: Bos- ton because is their opinion that freight containerized within 50 miles of Boston is subject to ILA stuffing, even though they don’t service the port—that is, even though PRMSA doesn’t service the port. Semack had expressed same conviction during our first chat on Tues- day. Personal opinion: Semack or whomever he would refer me to would have said that they are denying us trailer because (1) we are loading within 50 miles of port of Boston, and (2) even though this not consolidated LTL Shipments, DFI is not beneficial owner of cargo. Because of SL group position and Semack’s earlier and similarly stated conviction, seems that we not going to be able to handle this Marr load without subjecting our- selves to $1000 fine or stripping and restuffing charge. NSTRUCTION PAGE | _ 588 (ieee r 1 READ YOUR a io — SALAD ang. WH 60/ SHIPPER'S BILL OF LADING NO. “OR FORWAROES . | 150095 Beal#lirtntge 012 ' SHORT FORM THROUGH _— OF LADING FEREN 01261 SEALAND SERVICE | FOR PUERTO PX ti¥achut 62 "eet Fre DOCH ReECkINI Curd Let RAS VERGE I: ) ae ONLY OKING no/ —* "VOYAGE NO. CONTAINERS ‘LOADED CONN. CODE BOX NO. SEAL NO. NO.OF PIECES WEIGHT By x EY. © " ° FOR OFFICE USE ONLY S. S. NEW ORLEANS Boop [Mee . 1S 4 u* 4 | | Yo ll 8 ONSIGNED TO: (NAME ANO COMPLETE ADORESS) [STORE DOOR DELIVERY RINT neo ; mon Ae MESEER EELIVER s atl enh Yee ght ape, a? ~ re cctpanbe &4 e 4 ISUENG ee Wee rn. re foe ; ; ee i a ee ae abeded ed ed, " © be Oe sheet Maoh watse. fu he AW. pees attal A o ¢ ‘ TLiLA tar, WIIG Lite io . Why ee ’ . : ¥ se 4 ies. Be, ts : MOT ire, Viel HAGE SHORY { ORM TUROUCH Cit 0} LADINNIG : ’ . ‘ 1 — ry i7Anprn \ ’ “On — War vig en a ; ee eer ee : mer BOqP TEER E NPL OHe CONSENTED (GU snake Ut? SuntigdulioieD Ad Uiidinds) F ron pucare "4 ‘aii eatin Ra ttt trad solesonteus i, J a | ‘4 () ty *) 3 U 09 i : - ; one. enieg The 4 Ui OF Laing uv On runwe NAL as Hereuence “e basco ts. I" Jonisinia triad sainien -° Olas tiny bc 4 ne, 9 anges Baden oon “tl e fags nPrcryn va ae ‘ SaVUOosS — Leed Neos OSA 1h ° | i Qharles Luvler me. 4 : ¥ 4 Alp | ee " . wos oe me i. or ¢ . SOs mis ¢- . . . . OOo. wom eres « oT . eh coc gree emma os, - s erees . ‘ ae 24%. m4 ; , ° ° . ww wee ( Ps 1 + vee hye UT’) I. chu “ wn Tas nee “¥ LG Wo gD Corea Cooe “eu ——— A Py { La f 4 7.if¢ vy, 3° OPT ie 6 Oe om orem ALa\aee JN oar ihe... fan dtse nu, & | Sir Prices” | weignt a ee Medes a i S , fupt os 3 1973) Ae asst i wae: FON SHRCE USE ONLY _ it he POG BREE. att sa ° * ° ! : us os , hee Be eS Sate . Wg cee ee tie r roe } 7, G SISO | . $ ¢ me cs ' ad a MY a I . i *, *f 1 ; e ° e S oe 8 20 7's ib wee a ‘ee J 4 $ a7 e » ‘ i . a e aa” s ere ute &s pe LL na eee oe a . . ° ‘ *.° Py F . eo °T ae ae Poche: * me ‘ | S . ‘ ie “ is . ® ' - ~ . F WS : ; 4 te ®, fe ne ye ate ( me a ' ig, gt ; ee cs ! LSI ¥0 ' / So . i : ae Sy eaeoaeieed ROMSTSaand (Com ese ak PRIN) 0 ss ON A 6 eras nie Oe acc prt mn ‘* . Ves * 4 5 bosa oe aie g bs ‘ “ ‘ ' ; * * j * oy “0 * : ‘ PEL, ’ ‘ 7 PY v's Pas e Hf rAG \ pst yt EG | Har “ee , " 2 g | a i huatei mes 1 wevs Be r : : . ' : ey. ’ ‘ a aaa tty Be. ie > % PAs are vat ma Leg \ per ‘ay or pike er) ewes, J Oy we j : mh / =: bs . 7 -—- —— . é ‘ . a ! an Pe oT ene e bs -t ** Meine = eo#C LAME na ce 4 : . X ° 23 " PICK-UP - ae ete 3 Lus.e co ; fie . | 3 , 4 . 7. of. ee ee ee et ee ee oP Ow eeme 6+ - ee oe «eee Sehchd enaboerosd, 7 ru snamiquinioputinnEte - . * H . * . 5 ONO Olte BOeteas at Mee bette ce cumbleted siedelewud Aegvle i 5 vines * a, TS a tutes ie a a we Pt. i rae ‘ .* he "4 7! 8 , . yous pe parma belpeoee, (hue hypiregul r be saquttcs Speends: oe eeated coepeen Te matey By vn Ay * 63 orae ts ° = ey ere f = aa BY12. . BS pmmont ots ond ne ect Crryerape weemengs ©.0 ets = ot b edeny te Mee wid porto wed teak be ve rete ot low penwilide jrvtided by Ww pt myphiny lnlew o¢ wiplewsing. 22 LANDING Cu. #T. @ ' f°: ; ’ ae} s. Ai, re i or sa? Pate ease ste . ~= - . : ‘ ae ‘ ‘ . SE meeeed te , . . - ° Y i e, . . : . 7 ’ A hag . % ‘ ; : . * i, , . 4 Cx 7 gis ee ° oe, A, eX . ? ‘he . y ; o e Ae”. . 4 P ve . $ ® ey . ‘ : 2 ° Lhd : ’ e - ; s SCUD LDS whe tncads se! Le chad 700 CF ‘Mls? Le accusted delivery service isn Pucrteo Rico . at the rates provided fcr such ‘Service, Except lons-ellousenold Gouds, Cem contro. cargo ane pieces excecdlag 15 feec, shiomeacs SEAYICE mt INC, ’ IMPORTANT; 7" READ YOUR . [INSTRUCTION PACE Leh Laolld YY) HAUTE, NG ti FORM THROUGH BILL OF UADING (HOT NEGOTIARLE UNL FAS CONSIONER of) PAPER OF'* ANO IDENTIFIED AS ORIGINAL) Uk No bil - SEA-LAND SERVICE O0CK RECEIPT COPY C-117U FOR PUERTO RICAN AND VIRGIN ‘ssl ANO SHIPMENTS ONLY 591 183 SPP ERS GILL OF LADING NOW off Lice saad REFERENCE ts SEA-LAND BOOKING NO. 156243 oe Lise us £7 PS @ TING PORT OF puis PORT OF OISCHARGE ANO/OR TERMINAL OTHER ORIGIN OF SHIPMENT IF OTHER THAN THE ABOVE at LAND SERVICE, INC. |r). Titesabeth JOU, Drowce Ovid OMAR | vag: Q: mast 10. OF MARKS AND DESCRIPTION OF INDIVIDUAL COMMODITIES. bag gM bo eg EXPORT DECLARATION DATA -CKAGES Type of Packages -Full Description of Merchandise -Meagurements Where Required (PER COMMODITY) st hg DORF | COMMODITY NO. | TSraSe UNIT) [iNcAAtsT $) oats wourt : 25 hate Shees | BOO] 4b D J50G.09 76 J7 46 * €0 fins Auto Pts a 1562) 43 D | 4500.03 7% S257 4 ab oy a 54 80 D . 48GO .CE.S Tx g, t 86 {ins Cloth or Fabrics . eee tan +. ie O3G 0 190 tas Paper peticies NOG |. Fe 4. 4693 17 D 7, Abo. re 54 |\FYeCo .173.ftns Furniture,office & Parts 25 * 10521/1500 . | D , 1600 0be3 HL Ls OS pa prums Liquia Sop) itt | L756) 150. D Le 775.00 ‘Ss. —-f YO 4° fins Blec Cable ee hey ie a am 212 e D t tok a erm = cay 3 areal | BUT bps i ; | ee mL ae Bis. : eo hater chet fat | jet Raunitd : : ; : Tut eat eles tQee® Et - 1a nh : OPS Limes met ' ANCE OPTION PER PUBLISHED TARIFFS & POLICIES (SEE REVERSE SIDE) TOTALS : ae ee ie & ; oe = . qt TOTAL OCEAN FREIGHT FAS ERAGE risks, =CJAtc risks (Jetause SRace § 23 PICK-UP LO3.0 a ort Decleration Section of this Iorm is completed, Sea-Lond Service, Inc, is hereby authorized to act as forwarding agent for 22 LANDING, WA UA L8S.¢ i: 7 ‘ Ss control ond customs purposes.(FMC Appl.#30} The exporter declares that ail information contained in the Export Deciaratiar 7 ‘7 7 Apia Bill of Loading ia true ond correct ond that he is aware of the penalties provided by law for making false or misleading 22 LANDING Vb. f. cu. FT. @ L e o~ 3b ’ 16 OELIVERY Los.e ; ined of daclered ns ot the soopacte to Rereby epecilically Slated by the shipper to be nutouceodingn eee Ber ne Property. = 25 INSURANCE ON $ @ t Rana raeetaa mt CARRIER, BY? ™ = 16 OOCUMENTATION ; | | OT +—mmae = --- -- wn- 6B aie SLL baloge apres 592 7 [ IMPORTANT: TELA SR MWIGE, USG, — StRAND meee ss * OS Pas oy READ YOUR SHORT FORM THROUGH BILL’ OF LADING [ti a INSTRUCTION PACE (not NEGOTIARLE UNLESS CONSIGRE “70 PRPER OF** AKO IDENTIFIED AS ORIGINAL) FOR PUERTO wy VIRGIN ISUAND SHIPMENTS ON DATE T'sHiPPER'S BILL OF LADING NO..OA FORWARDERS REFERENCE ORIGINATING CARRIER — SEA-LAND BOOKING NO. 12 13 73 150249 Seal No. LifChi01254/55 Lifschultz, FeFrt 11-00523 VESSEL VOYAGE NO. Ff CONTAINERS LOADED - "| COMM. CODE «hie “= wt fon 80% NO SEAL HO. NO.OF PIECES -| | WEIGHT =o SFFICE SE ONLY \ | 3 2 Te) a " : F S ce On, | ay a ._-_----— = CONSIGNED TO: (NAME AND COMPLETE ADORESS) “STORE DOOR DELIVERY: J, oT UNLESS CHECKED, DELIVERY | SHIPPER: (NAME ANO COMPLETE ADDRESS) MAME-STREET-ADORE 88°C ITY ma EQUIRZED 7 WILL BE PERFORMED S.J. ea ¥. Inc : 103 | an Juan Freight Forwarders ates 7 a ee: ns , | : 1300 So. Dearboron Avenue ae Carolina, erto Rico Chicago,i11. wOTICE TO : “ ee a eat Sot 22 + NOING Los.@ - xporlt control ond customs purposes. ft @ exporter decicres thet oll information contained in the Export Decicroetior GLE 29 ¢ Sand - this Bill of Leding is true and eerrees ead that he is Seeee of the penalties provided by law lor making bales misleading 22 LANOING 12s OC). Cu. FT. @ = 2 é ements. = } a Cee one 5 Rear ; eae g ee Y le 2 4 ist 4 bey Acting Vapor Linod : iN rh a aw” yet P ‘ kei re a é. ® ‘| * TEN. ; ¥y os “3 a 4 3 iy 7 lt se fa ' é 3 ples N om aoe . , Rog ; i sa iat” tf > ee Ki. “tet é. 1 john Staryin : 4 wae wee goth e aes + cg . 310" . J, ed EOP Ee ea Bite Fe: “A yd oe B73. ee wy 3 ict Cleaner aft Be rat fone te ae | Ea oe Po Re ag? bt y el G32 Ay wis i ial pated Ss") INen Paneer & : Panay Upocuetn ‘Koo ‘ota BE 30 Ze LOE Pa alate Bree ee Be be dea! é / a, ek cS am | pe ~ r.-7 ! ¢ ' vee", be wae bs is a Wee, Bo ay S¢ 6 » : oO ae aig ‘ ; ; + ie i 4 me ~ ' sl ese oe ier) } TOLRAY, PIECH BN ve - , rg Manel on. ae ol P a | : a? os ‘ ta , sgt ¥ ~ ory f re pq 92 ot : a 4° yy “. shy t, ’ ee CORR ATL ueTEm em © | reentheg say aon.» are eres ems”. fe aoe . a Cae, IA Spee ieee final, # O00 é aie “4 age fe i, pee se is ’e oar ; ' ' os aw - 2 a xe . ve has | Ma ° a ve. a ms , ' ‘ # Wit Oe me pee ee SA Ree WEN ts é il “Set wt}, i . ee ee). eee 1 mee oF ee . 2 2 othe ae — vg a AOS ; i \ ‘ er) net ing PLA PUM iam D tamers & Pouce e rity nevenae come. : ror my - ) ee ie "ne oni A 2° Pe Nee Se eae “nice [anaes ocencey remeron lide EC EAM ESD) ee fee * atin hd . * x t dite ’ . ' Be yh an % . a Ot Sat ny [ciate inn: cuesgen * Lane cc at is. Sibel ae tun ote la BEA: f 23. “LPIEK: _ « eee “4.05,6 : Fuese gf art? ee Oe , Ve . ot me eee en! ae eee ae “pens hs a ~ Stee i + 1 eae repr 7 oe ” - ‘ “e eet tone teutean t Tae ttent on thie ie, ie enaleingy (sini Sec z Ium to Recep ‘ se a4 Snel fort pied ont So ‘22. “LANDING - ‘ Ay a - LAS. |. 2 Gi. a 7? ’ ' present om id'g E ° P @ot.ot 6 sened ne / oe es, . ° ‘ . 4 Bed -, = eer * ir oy ‘ ¥ ~~? * Ae! Gis oe Et ow + a J ‘ dost bot ie ’ ° B ii vt,’ 2 . ; ee . me wee > ff ed Thi 4 : : *. _s ele ee 8 P ut . ; a oy ars. peas ; We ra) 3 rs 7a ° ‘ ff’ : i : ; . 5 ap dadbiaimiatasin sci Ritthgs sg RM 8 ia eo a eS vehi neh mein trey ene scene oe oqo enemy et ete Ny : IO Ee ARE chy CN iS Rr ae era ase rrr ae ie , ft eas ' a 5" 5 es ‘ *, »* "6 “ie se eset pe “ie ie a or . if ‘ add -¢ a ° é . y Wide faire 7 ons . ’ _) W ’ : . ' - 7 f : aay’ ; are a ace . - yet eer . ey yy ay rd oo % ; is . '; ‘ . oP ¢? fe ee righ = ; * 5 . a d . yi é : y 7 - : a fe ‘e 0, °° on oa tate ie ‘a } oF ered we ed wel nd eh Fed ee a ee td ee wer ly cee ne q s . a ; be Sf wsteucrioe Bac | SHORT FOR! THROUGH BILL OF LADING. hace 1 he at tested ty, (nor NEGOTIAGLE UNLESS CONSIGNED ‘To “Mm; CR OF AND IDENTIFIED AS AP GINALT ng. aR PY RT AGM stun 607d SHIPMENTS Ow wy Ave [samen RICE «+. ADING N& OR FORWARDERS REFERGNCI Up [ORIGINATING CARRIER Ay eitety Petiteas NG 19. ‘ f cms ‘ fe . ee 7°) 1187 | i” SBAU 81957. ) Sead yhirchioi213/14 (© |idfschults F Frt.. 1! ~05330 a SSEu — VOYAGE Nor T CONTAINERS LOA 0 f=. _] COMM: Qos Fish —— Pad "BOX NO. “SEAL NO, NO.OF PICCES | WEIGHT | A 0 \ W iy Peo FOR OFFICE USE BY a Poe, sf : eee ° Jes at ad = 4 i RY Niecy, / ee FOS ---—_— eee «oe om me ame Se aneetm, yo wet “r+ ene ‘ONSIGNEDO TO: (NAME AND COMPLETE AOORESS) STORE DOOR OFLIVEKY Te N UNLESS CHECKED, O€LiveRY | SHIPPER: (NAME AKD COMPLETE ‘*ORESS) WAMEeTREKTOAOUNE SY CITY E | ' - San JuanFrethet Inc. th IReouineo_ J vit ot renromieo Son Juan freichs Torwerders,Inc. Carolina, Puerto Rico ) 28 No. Prontii. wou > ie pees Chicero a real as ° ; CUTER **SAME"’ IF DELIVERY 15 TO AC it*t: 35 CONSIGNEE ADDNESS ‘OUTING 2 PORT OF LOADING — Nant OF DISCHARGE AUD?ON I EerIKAL Greg SV ORIGIN GF SATOH ir it O7 rr oe. Ros Peele AOOVED ith’ LAD SERVICE, HC. For rt_ ELLE pbe «.: Pe | mY Set {_jPonce * wee mints OM, ¥) a ‘ gate Avia wrbtiide NO. OF MARKS ANO DESCRIPTION OF INDIVIDUAL COMMODITIES | canes weigut | MEASUREMENT EXPORT DECLARATION DATA PACKAGES !Type of Pockoges -Full Deseription of Merchandise -Moosurements Whero Speed wen commosiry ‘coulisiry, OORF | COMMODITY NO, (sTate unit) INCANE ST $) = seciecstatd , v ; ee eCtns Valves : 0 See D 160.00 26 7 / PP 7Ctns Screws,Iron or Steel 240 | 7 D ne SC. “ge ae me Z\xe whew Parts,moachine 1376 ad | D NODC z ry L196 14Cons Brooms or Mons 155S9 | 1300 D Pecatce ee Pies "ton ins Binders or Covers ao tt, Le 3206 or a te ¥w% ‘3Ctns: Fans Electric . a se ee ee 12 = aa Age /'¢ f aCinsBlowers or Exauct | 198 on oe Be 32 > {77 Z'%o Ctns Hampers 280 20 D Ry ‘ oi 73 1:60 “Kpdileta Paperboard 5000 “LL 15 D 3006 Yo fa\co EEE, 15 i : | y - G0 ast . ! ! INSYRSNCE OPTION PER £ ; ~" a NW PER PUBLISHED TARIFFS & POLICIES (SEE REVERSE SIDE) hence LS VA : : TOTAL OCEAN FREICHT 91) ! Lp P AN ’ ne : MES COVERAGE ASKS Catt risks whet Ao ces 23 PICK-UP L8s.¢ oe fa eee ne, 7a - Aor cubhcel eal Section = oa Piste * cae. soa-tand Service, teen in *heroiry. éuthorized to act os ieee r. soon for ‘22 ~LANOINGY EES LDS.¢ vy AES ieetion of ‘thes Bill of Leding 3 Gee ond eanveat aad caak. he io Seats pl ita penalties venaedte: eet nort ene > miabeodine 22 \LANDING® iP A atcu. FT. @ | ce, ! RP IA 16 DELIVERY _ ee eynnier Th sateed of Cocteled salac el Meera eres sce reared te ata sioted by the Enieper to be Suied oc soatnevt soing _— neers: LSA RE aa ae SHIPOER. mao eee ee TCaRniea, Ov: OSS FSS SE Po eS Sees 10 DOCUMCTATION ee ae fees PERE ‘“¢ =. tte wes aaa ee 30 OTHER SRN | ; Biba OO eH toa ig Tok t= — — aa cee TOTAL CHARGES’ afl 53 | Bree apeupreccnnp mie ate a jor | / Y¥. 77 ee 595 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD REGION 2 Case Nos. 2-CC-1364, 2-CE-75, 2-CC-1365 INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN’S ASSOCIATION AND NEW YORK SHIPPING ASSOCIATION, INC. and DOLPHIN FORWARDING, INC. and SAN JUAN FREIGHT FORWARDERS, INC. FILE Judges Div. FILE IN FORMAL FILE Received Oct. 19, 1977 Dlv. of Judges NLRB Wash., D.C. NYSA’S DIRECT CASE STATE OF NEW YORK ) . ihe COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) JOHN M. HAYNES, being duly sworn deposes and says: ; I am the Executive Vice President of Respondent, New : York Shipping Association, Inc. (““NYSA”). I submit ; the following direct testimony and annexed exhibits on behalf of Respondent, NYSA. . I was first employed by NYSA in 1958 as special as- ; sistant to NYSA’s Chairman. Prior to my employment ee 596 with NYSA, I was employed by American President Lines, first as a seagoing officer and later as its port captain or terminal manager at its pier facility in the Port of New York. I have from time to time physically observed the operations at most of the waterfront fa- cilities in the Port of Greater New York. My duties a. functions, first as special assistant to NYSA’s Chairma, then as NYSA’s Administrative Director, and now as Executive Vice President, have consisted of active par- ticipation in the negotiation, administration and imple- mentation of labor contracts entered into by NYSA with the International Longshoremen’s Association, AFL-CIO (“ILA”). I am intimately and personally aware of the facts and circumstances set forth in this direct case. I. Interested Persons A. Employer Associations 1. Council of North Atlantic Shipping Associations (“CONASA”) is an unincorporated multi-employer bar- gaining association, which functions as the collective bar- gaining representative in negotiating and administering collective bargaining agreements with the International Longshoremen’s Association, AFL-CIO (“ILA”) covering terms and conditions of employment of longshore labor in the ports of Boston, New York, Providence, Philadel- phia, Baltimore and Hampton Roads, on the North At- lantic coast of the United States. Its members are the various employer shipping associations operating in the six major North Atlantic ports, as follows: The Boston Shipping Association, Inc. Rhode Island Shipping Association, Inc. New York Shipping Association, Inc. (“NYSA”) Philadelphia Marine Trade Association Steamship Trade Association of Baltimore, Inc. and Hampton Roads Shipping Association CONASA’s constituent port association members, each negotiate and administer collective bargaining agree- ments with the ILA covering local conditions. 597 2. NYSA is an incorporated New York Not-for-Profit membership association which negotiates and administers collective bargaining agreements with ILA on behalf of its members. The membership of NYSA consists of steve- dores, common carriers by water, carrier agents, termi- nal operators, lighterers, contracting guard service and other concerns functioning in waterfront related activ- ities involving or related to the ocean shipment of cargo, freight and the transportation of passengers. 3. For many decades, beginning on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts commenced with negotiations between the ILA and its constituent locals, and NYSA in the Port of New York. After agreement had been reached with NYSA, the ILA would bargain with. other ports. In 1956, a major demand of the ILA in New York negotia- tions was for the extension of bargaining on a coast-wide basis. After a lengthy strike that year the employer as- sociations in the other North Atlantic ports agreed that NYSA could execute a master contract on behalf of itself and the other North Atlantic ports with respect to certain specified issues. In 1956, and in each of the succeeding collective bargaining periods, including the one ending _ September 30, 1971, master contracts covering the speci- fied items were entered into: by NYSA with the ILA for and on behalf of itself and the other North Atlantic em- ployer associations. Prior to negotiations of the 1971- 1974 contract with the ILA the co: :tituent member as- sociations of CONASA entered into an arrangement to form CONASA. Thereupon, negotiations commenced be- tween CONASA and the ILA concerning various terms and conditions that would be applicable to all North Atlantic ports. Certain other items known as local work- ing conditions would still be negotiated locally by each of the ports with ILA. On November 16, 1971, CONASA and the ILA formalized the scope of their negotiations in a memorandum of agreement, annexed hereto as Exhibit 1, which reads in pertinent part as follows: “1. ILA and CONASA agree to act as the collec- tive bargaining representatives for their con- stituent locals and members, as referred to 598 above, on the seven master contract items which are as follows: Wages Hours Contributions to the Welfare Plans (but not the benefits) Co [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40385006_1534%3A04. Public record. Not legal advice.