Source: http://www.carsandracingstuff.com/library/government/390US261.php
Timestamp: 2019-04-23 06:35:14+00:00

Document:
$29,000,000 FUND TO MITIGATE THE EFFECT OF TECHNOLOGICAL UNEMPLOYMENT.
FUND FROM ITS MEMBERS.  PMA APPROVED AN ASSESSMENT PER "REVENUE TON,"
OR CARGO COMPETITIVE THEREWITH; AND THAT THERE WAS NO VIOLATION OF SEC.
OF THE ACT.  PP. 268-278.
ASSESSMENTS TO BE PASSED ON.  P. 273.
WITHIN ITS LITERAL TERMS.  P. 274.
THE MYRIAD OF RESTRICTIVE MARITIME AGREEMENTS.  PP. 275-276.
WAS NEITHER DE MINIMIS NOR ROUTINE.  PP. 276-277.
AUTOMOBILES IS CHALLENGED.  P. 278.
UNDER SEC. 16.  PP. 279-280.
IS REASONABLYRELATED TO THE SERVICE RENDERED.  PP. 280-282.
125 U.S.APP.D.C. 282, 371 F.2D 747, REVERSED AND REMANDED.
INTERNATIONAL LONGSHOREMEN'S AND WAREHOUSEMEN'S UNION (ILWU) IS ONE.
OF SOME $5,000,000 A YEAR.
OF SECTION 16 OF THE SHIPPING ACT, 1916, AS AMENDED, 46 U.S.C.
CERTIORARI TO CONSIDER IMPORTANT QUESTIONS UNDER THE SHIPPING ACT.
CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, OR TO BE IN VIOLATION OF (THE ACT) . .
WHETHER COMMISSION'S RULING WAS SUPPORTED BY "SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE."
DECISION."  124 U.S.APP.D.C.,AT 290, 371 F.2D, AT 755.
JUDICIAL INERTIA . . . "  AMERICAN SHIP BUILDING CO. V. NLRB, 380 U.S.
FINDING THAT THE ASSESSMENT AGREEMENT DID NOT SO "AFFECT COMPETITION,"
MEMBERSHIP TO PASS ON ALL OR A PORTION OF ITS ASSESSMENTS . . . "
CLEAR THAT THE CONCERNS OF ITS INQUIRY WERE FAR MORE BROADLY RANGING.
FAVORABLE TO A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT SUPERVISION . . .
VITALLY AFFECT THE INTERESTS OF SHIPPERS."  ALEXANDER REPORT, AT 418.
AMERICAN SHIPPERS, RAILROADS OR OTHER TRANSPORTATION AGENCIES."
OR BE DETRIMENTAL TO COMMERCE.
AND MAY, BY ORDER, REVOKE ANY SUCH EXEMPTION."  /26/  46 U.S.C.
833A (1964 ED., SUPP. II).
REQUIRED TO BE FILED UNDER SEC. 15 OF THE ACT.
OPINION IS TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS QUESTIONING THEIR CONTINUING VALIDITY.
EXPEDITIOUS APPROVAL OF SO MUCH OF THE AGREEMENT AS IS NOT IN DISPUTE.
DISADVANTAGE,"  /27/  AND SEC. 17 FORBIDS ANY "UNJUST OR UNREASONABLE"
E.G., PRACTICES, ETC., OF SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA TERMINALS, 2 U.S.M.C.
UNDER SEC. 17 DOES NOT DEPEND UPON UNLAWFUL OR DISCRIMINATORY INTENT.
676 (1964).  CF. UNITED STATES V. ILLINOIS CENTRAL R. CO., 263 U.S.
515, 523-526; ICC V. CHICAGO G.W.R. CO., 209 U.S. 108.
LINE), 144 N.L.R.B. 1432, 1442 (1963).
ALTHOUGH IT WAS IMPLEMENTED IN MANY RESPECTS PRIOR TO THAT DATE.
BEING COLLECTED AND PAID OUT.
DECREASED.  THE AMOUNT OF THE DECREASE DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE RECORD.
INITIALLY INCREASED AN ESTIMATED 31%.
SITUATION, SUCH AS FREEDOM FROM STRIKES AND SLOWDOWNS.
A SINGLE MEMBER WHO WAS A STEVEDORING CONTRACTOR OR TERMINAL OPERATOR.
OF THE MECH FUND WAS BORNE BY ASSOCIATION MEMBERS.
/13/  VOLKSWAGENWERK AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT V. FMC, 125 U.S.APP.D.C.
AND WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ANY REGULATIONS THE COMMISSION MAY ADOPT."
UPON REASONABLE NOTICE WITHOUT PENALTY FOR SUCH WITHDRAWAL.
REQUESTS AND COMPLAINTS."  46 U.S.C. 814.
AMENDMENTS AND ACTS SUPPLEMENTARY THERETO."  46 U.S.C. 814.
U.S.APP.D.C.,AT 290, N. 7, 371 F.2D, AT 290, N. 7, 371 F.2D, AT 755, N.
POOLS INVESTIGATION, 9 F.M.C. 264, 289.
U.S.APP.D.C.,AT 299, 211 F.2D, AT 57.
FORWARDERS IN DIFFERENT PORTS TO PERFORM SERVICES FOR EACH OTHER.  H.R.
REP.NO. 2248, 89TH CONG., 2D SESS., 4-5 (1966).
INTO BOTH THE HOUSE AND SENATE REPORTS ON THE SHIPPING ACT.  H.R. REP.
CONG., 1ST SESS., 7-12 (1916).
TO THE CARRIER AND THE GOVERNMENT.
PIECEMEAL APPROACH IN THE FUTURE."
CHANGES AND TRANSACTIONS NOT SUBJECT TO SEC. 15.  IN ORANJE LINE V.
U.S.M.C. 106 (1939), AS HOLDING JOINT ADVERTISING NOT SUBJECT TO SEC.
PREJUDICE OR DISADVANTAGE IN ANY RESPECT WHATSOEVER . . . "  46 U.S.C.
REGULATION OR PRACTICE."  46 U.S.C. 816.
/29/  SEE N. 17, SUPRA.
U.S.S.B. 101 (1926); PHILADELPHIA OCEAN TRAFFIC BUREAU V. EXPORT S.S.
MAATSCHAPPIJ "NEDERLAND," 4 F.M.B. 343 (1953); WEST INDIES FRUIT CO. V.
FLOTA MERCANTE, 7 F.M.C. 66 (1962).
FREIGHTS AND CHARTERING 400-407 (1962).
ST. L.R. CO., 229 I.C.C. 497, 501.
THAT IT WAS."  6 F.M.B.,AT 418-419.
/34/  SEE N. 8, SUPRA.
NOTWITHSTANDING THAT IT HAS ALREADY DETERMINED THEM.              I.
DESIRABLE STEP FORWARD IN THE SHIPPING INDUSTRY.
MULTI-EMPLOYER BARGAINING BOUND TO ARISE IN THE FUTURE."  ID., AT 96.
FORMS THE BACKGROUND TO THIS CASE IS ADDITIONAL "COGENT EVIDENCE."
BRADLEY CO. V. UNION, 325 U.S. 797.  IT IS A PROBLEM OF LINE-DRAWING.
CONSEQUENTLY, HE SUGGESTS THAT A PROPER ACCOMMODATION BETWEEN "LABOR"
ANTITRUST LAWS AND SECS. 16 AND 17 OF THE SHIPPING ACT.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, TO THE "WAIT-AND-SEE" APPROACH.
THEY NEED NOT FILE IF THEY ARE IN AN AREA OF LABOR BOARD "CONCERN."
OR AN EMPLOYER AGREEMENT COLLATERAL THERETO.
OF LABOR PROBLEMS THAT IT IS NOT EQUIPPED TO RESOLVE.
EMPLOYERS AND (IN CONSEQUENCE) AMONG THEIR CUSTOMERS.
MODERNIZATION, TWO THINGS WOULD HAVE FOLLOWED:  THE "ALLOCATION"
WENT ALONG, LEAVING SHIPPING CUSTOMERS UNAFFECTED.
AGREEMENT ALSO MADE CHOICES AMONG CUSTOMERS OF AN INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYER.
FOR THE TRADE OF SHIPPERS OF THAT PRODUCE I SIMPLY CANNOT UNDERSTAND.
ON REMAND OF THE CASE.
DIFFERENCE IN RATES, IT IS IN THIS CASE.
DEFINITION OF WHETHER THE BURDENS HAVE BEEN "UNFAIRLY" ALLOCATED.
OBVIOUSLY, AS THE DEBATES IN THE PMA INDICATE, THERE WAS NO "PERFECT"
ADOPTED WAS THE FAIREST THAT COULD BE DEVISED.
CHARGES ARE AS APPROPRIATELY PROPORTIONED AS WOULD BE FEASIBLE.
BENEFITS, AND NOT PERFECTLY OR EXACTLY RELATED, EVANS COOPERAGE CO. V.
JOIN THE COURT'S OPINION UPON THE PREMISES STATED IN THIS OPINION.
/1/  61 STAT. 142, 29 U.S.C. 158(D).
15 OF TITLE 15 (ANTITRUST PROVISIONS) . . .
/3/  OF COURSE, CONGRESS DID NOT, IN SEC. 15, REQUIRE "GOOD"
/5/  E.G., MINE WORKERS V. PENNINGTON, 381 U.S. 657; MEAT CUTTERS V.
EMPLOYER BARGAINING UNIT WITHOUT VIOLATING THE ANTITRUST LAWS . . . "
PREPARATORY TO BARGAINING OR WHEN THEY SIGN AN AGREEMENT.
MAKE UP THE $2.35 ADDITIONAL COST SOMEWHERE.
/7/  THE FACT THAT THE "LABOR" AGREEMENT AND THE "ASSESSMENT"
AGREEMENT WERE ON DIFFERENT PIECES OF PAPER IS OF COURSE NOT CRITICAL.
TO BE A SINGLE AGREEMENT RAISING SOME PROBLEMS OF LABOR BOARD "CONCERN"
AND OTHER, SEPARATE PROBLEMS APPROPRIATE TO COMMISSION REVIEW.
SAN DIEGO, 9 F.M.C. 525.
FROM THE MARITIME COMMISSION IS TO USE A SLEDGE HAMMER TO FIX A WATCH.
HANDED MANAGEMENT OF SENSITIVE LABOR PROBLEMS.
TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS IN THE SHIPPING INDUSTRY.
STABILITY.  THE SHIPPING ACT, 1916, IS ONE EXAMPLE OF THIS CONCERN.
RESULTING BY 1920 IN A SIGNIFICANT EXPANSION OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING.
HIGHLY DISRUPTIVE AND VIOLENT PACIFIC COAST STRIKE OF 1934.
OR CHANGE IN AN EXISTING CONTRACT ALSO HAD TO BE FILED WITH THE BOARD.
IN 1948 ANOTHER GENERAL MARITIME STRIKE ROCKED THE PACIFIC COAST.
HANDLING, /15/ SLING-LOAD WEIGHT, /16/  AND GANG-SIZE RESTRICTIONS.
CAN BE APPRECIATED.  THAT WAS THE HEART OF THE 1960-1961 SETTLEMENT.
1960, CULMINATED 4 YEARS OF DISCUSSION BETWEEN THE PMA AND THE ILWU."
INTRODUCTION AND USE OF MECHANIZATION AND OTHER LABOR-SAVING DEVICES.
SPEED UP OF THE INDIVIDUAL."
AGREED TO PERMIT PMA TO ESTABLISH THE METHOD OF PAYMENT.
AGAINST THE FAR-REACHING EFFECTS OF MODERNIZATION.
FUNDING FORMULA AT THE SAME TIME.
OR AT LEAST PARTIALLY PARALYZE, COLLECTIVE BARGAINING?
INTEREST IN WHICH OF THE POSSIBLE COST ALLOCATION PLANS WAS ADOPTED . .
MERE "SIDE AGREEMENT."  BUT WITHOUT THE SO-CALLED "SIDE AGREEMENT"
THE CHOICE OF THE ROUTE TO THAT OBJECTIVE."  BUT THAT MISSES THE MARK.
IF THE PRESENT PRACTICE IS AN ABUSE, THERE IS AN EXISTING REMEDY.
PARALYZING EFFECT WHICH WILL FOLLOW WHEN PRIOR APPROVAL IS REQUIRED.
COOPERATIVE WORKING AGREEMENT."  46 U.S.C. 814 (SEC. 15).
INTEREST, OR TO BE IN VIOLATION OF THIS CHAPTER . . . "
SUCH AGREEMENT . . . "
DISADVANTAGE IN ANY RESPECT WHATSOEVER . . . "  46 U.S.C. 815 (SEC.
PRACTICE."  46 U.S.C. 816 (SEC. 17).
1914.  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES, H.R. DOC. NO.
805, 63D CONG., 2D SESS. (1914).
EVENTUALLY RENDERED REPRESENTED SUBSTANTIAL GAINS FOR THE UNION.
WERE TO BE SUBMITTED TO ARBITRATION.
RULES, 15 IND. & LAB.REL.REV.  295, 296 (1962).
/8/  KOSSORIS, SUPRA, N. 4, AT 1.
VIEW TO PROMOTING STABLE LABOR RELATIONS IN THE MARITIME INDUSTRY."
THE UNITED STATES OR ANY OTHER LAWS RELATING TO SEAMEN."  52 STAT.
MARINE AND FISHERIES, 84TH CONG., 1ST AND 2D SESS. (1955-1956).
(PRE-EMPTION OF STATE LAW BY FEDERAL LABOR ENACTMENTS); MCCULLOCH V.
FOREIGH-FLAG SHIPS); MARINE ENGINEERS V. INTERLAKE S.S. CO., 370 U.S.
DISPUTES BETWEEN MARITIME EMPLOYEES AND FOREIGN SHIPS); LONGSHOREMEN V.
337 U.S. 31 (REPRESENTATION; REFUSAL TO BARGAIN); NLRB V. WATERMAN S.S.
CORP., 309 U.S. 206 (UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE).
/13/  KOSSORIS, SUPRA, N. 4, AT 2.
"THE LONGSHORE INDUSTRY IS TECHNOLOGICALLY AMONG THE MOST BACKWARD.
BEING HANDLED JUST AS THEY HAVE BEEN HANDLED SINCE SAILING SHIP DAYS.
MODERNIZATION AGREEMENT, 12 LAB.L.J. 664, 665 (1961).
THE FIRST BIG CHANGE IN TECHNOLOGY ALONG THE DOCKS, NOTES MR.
FROM HIS TRUCK ONTO THE DOCK.  KOSSORIA, SUPRA, N. 4, AT 2.
INSTITUTE OF LABOR & INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS (1967).
/18/  FAIRLEY, SUPRA, N. 14, AT 666.
/19/  KOSSORIS, SUPRA, N. 4, AT 1.
MEMBERS UNDER A MAN-HOUR FORMULA.
/22/  125 U.S.APP.D.C. 282, 293, 371 F.2D 747, 758 (1967).
ESTABLISH UNIFORM WAGES, FRINGE BENEFITS, AND WORKING CONDITIONS.
USED WITH RELATION TO THE MILLION DOLLARS AND A HALF.
WITHIN THE MEMBERSHIP OF PMA."
WHETHER OR NOT THE COLLECTIONS UNDER THE FUND WERE BEING MET.
DOUBT WHETHER IT COULD BE SAID THAT THE INTEREST OF THE UNION CEASED.
AS TO A METHOD OF PAYMENT."
/26/  SEE N. 24, SUPRA.
CONTRARY.  SEE N. 9, SUPRA.
IMPOSED NO HIGHER CHARGES ON VOLKSWAGENS THAN ON OTHER AUTOMOBILES.
OF THE SHIPPING ACT IS MODELED, UNITED STATES NAV. CO. V. CUNARD S.S.
AT LONGVIEW, WASHINGTON, 6 F.M.B. 178 (1960) (STORAGE CHARGES).
BENEFITED AS MUCH AS OTHER CARGO, IT DID RECEIVE "SUBSTANTIAL BENEFITS"
COMMISSION TO MAKE IN THE FIRST INSTANCE.
GENERAL TURNER, HOWARD E. SHAPIRO AND MILTON J. GROSSMAN.
WAREHOUSEMEN'S UNION, AS AMICUS CURIAE, URGING AFFIRMANCE.

References: V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V.

 V. 
 V.

 V. 
 V.