Extract
Exxon Shipping Co., 290 (1991)
Exxon Shipping Company and Exxon Seamen's
Union. Case 22-CA-15637April 5, 1991DECISION AND ORDERBY CHAIRMAN STEPHENS AND MEMBERSCRACRAFT AND DEVANEYOn June 26, 1989, Administrative Law Judge Steven Davis issued the attached decision. The General Counsel filed exceptions and a supporting brief, and the Respondent filed cross-exceptions and a supporting brief.The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.The Board has considered the decision and the record in light of the exceptions and briefs and has decided to affirm the judge's rulings, findings, and conclusions only to the extent consistent with this Decision and Order. For reasons stated in section C below, we decline to adopt his recommended Order dismissing the complaint.A. Factual FindingsThe Respondent is engaged, inter alia, in the business of coastwise shipping of petroleum products. The Union and its predecessor have had a collective-bargaining relationship with the Respondent for more than 30 years. All the 500 unlicensed seamen employed aboard the Respondent's approximately 19 ships are represented by the Union. The last collective-bargaining agreement ran from July 31, 1985, to August 31, 1987, but was extended to January 25, 1988. That agreement provided for a $15 bimonthly dues check-off. On January 25, the employees voted to reject the Respondent's contract proposal and, shortly thereafter, the Respondent terminated the contract and ceased making deductions for the union dues.For at least 30 years the Respondent has used a ''draw check order'' system by which employees could direct that a portion of their wages be sent to a bank or a specified name and address. The draw check order forms provide a blank space for specifying the amount or percentage of wages that are to be directed to the named payee, and they also provide that the payment authorization ''is to remain in effect until changed or revoked by me [the employee signing the form] in writing or until termination of employment.'' The form also contains boxes which may be checked to cancel or modify a previous authorization. There does not appear to be any statutory restriction on a coastwise voyaging sailor's designation of any payee as recipient of his pay; the order forms do not contain any restrictions on their face; and the Respondent has no written guidelines or restrictions on the use of draw checks, except as to the United Way.1 Although the Respondent's officials have told employees at orientation sessions that the draw check orders were for the purpose of having their pay sent to their families, the Respondent had permitted draw check orders for such purposes as paying taxes, making investments through brokerage accounts and mutual funds, and paying child support or alimony to former spouses.In February 1988, several seamen each completed a ''name and address'' draw check orde...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
