Full Volume 19 - Federal Maritime Commission

ZSE
FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION
Group was underassessed and3 that the underasseasment of the States
Marine Group during the 1971 1974 period exceeded any overasaessment
of that group during the preceding period thus wiping out the States
Marine Group sclaim Perhaps the weakest link in NYSA s argumentative chain is its
assumption as to what would have happened with respect to the
assessment for cargo in the Puerto Rican trade if the assessment formula
for the 1971 1974 period had been litigated The context in which the
assessment formulas for Puerto Rican cargo for the 1971 1974 and 1974
1977 periods were approved was one of settlement As stated in our order
of bonditional approval of the agreement between NYSA the ILA and
the Puerto Rico carriers for assessments for those periods we approved
that agreement because the parties appmach to setUement of the rights
and obligations between and among themselves does not appear to be
improper Considerations underlying settlements do not necessarily
coincide with the process
of making findings on a record in a litigated
proceeding See Agreement NoT2635 2ac icMaritime Association
Final Pay Guarantee Plan 16SR 103 132 133 1975 8 Moreover
although our decision in this proceeding in 15FMCestablishing the
assessment formula for the Puerto Rican carriers can be said to have
some significance for the future it has suchsi ificance only to the extent
that the facts and ciroumstances are the same in the futureie 1971
1974 1974 197 n as they were in 1971 1969 As we said in 15FMC at
282 We should also point out that our decision ofcou se applies only
to the obligations arising under AgreementT2390 and the particular
collective bargaining agreement which created the benefits to be funded
We cannot assume absent findings on arecord that conditions are the
same now as they were with respect to Agreement T2390s
To the extent that the record in ttus proceeding shows anyttring about
the applicadon of the formula adopted by the Commission for the Puerto
Rican carriers for the191971 assessment period to the later periods it
would appear to lend significant support to the argument that if the
matter had been litigatedshapplication would not have been made o
In both of his Initial Decisions in this prnceeding Judge Morgan noted
the likelihood thatawhole tonnage Pormuia ofthe type we have
approved for the 197 1977 period see page S supra would be the
appropriate and lawful form of assessment for al categories in the
Nothina we eey heroin ie to be coneUUed ae emtinp doubt upon the vaUdily oP thaPuerto Rican cartier orother
approveA aetqehent ayreementa ea betwean the pertiee theroto By virtue oP thoeeereemenn the partias Mve
reeolved theirdiffercncee in amanner which we have found to be propec ReQardleee of how the leeuw with re erdto the aseeaements forthe 1971 1974 end1974 1977 periode may Aave been roeolved if they had beea tWly Iltipated the
partiea wthe wttlement eyre emente exerciaed pood ailhIn atlempUnQ to predlcfdyhta end tiabWNeo and amnot be
fsWteA indaeiriny thet ea between tkemeelveeea wemrnt 6tlyslion ehoddcewe See Order of Inveetipetion and Hearing onAeement NoT30W covedny the 1914I977 eeeeeement period
pege3 eerved November 1 1974
We take no poeition ea to what Poerto Rican aeeewment tormWa woWd have been approved for the 1971 i974
and 197 1977 periada if theae matten had baen litipeled We wieh oNy to hiyNi ht the hipAly epeculatlve nature of
predictiona in thie rcyarcl
19FMC