Opinion ID: 717910
Heading Depth: 4
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Demanding Up to 130 Registrations

Text: 11 On February 3, 1993, ILWU requested a registration of up to 130 Class B longshoremen. On February 24, the Coast Committee agreed to register thirty Class B registrants. 12 The gist of Appellants' claim is that ILWU requested the registration of a large number of casual longshoremen, despite the fact that the collective bargaining agreement called for small and regular additions to the registration list, and that this demand was made to block the registration of casuals. 13 Although Appellants claim that ILWU made this demand consistently, we find in the record only one instance after the July 22, 1992 cutoff date, on February 3, 1993. After that date, the record does not show that ILWU repeated the demand. 2 14 Moreover, since it is not in dispute that ILWU requested the registration of up to 130 once within the relevant time period, the only issue with this allegation is whether ILWU's demand, taken in the light most favorable to the appellants, creates an inference that it was made so as to hinder the registration of the casual longshoremen. We do not believe that up to 130 supports such an inference. Because up to 130 allows for less than 130, ILWU could not be seen as insisting upon an impracticable number of registrations. Indeed, Appellant Castle-Scott testified at her deposition that she opposed the up to 130 figure because it could result in as little as one registration. 15