Southwestern Electric Service Co.

In the Matter of SOUTHWESTERN ELECTRIC SERVICE COMPANY, EM- PLOYER and LOCAL UNION 790, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, A. F. L.,1 PETITIONER Case No. 16-RC-286.-Decided July 12, 1949 DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Joseph A. Butler, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The business of the Employer : Southwestern Electric Service Company, a Texas corporation, is engaged in the purchase, generation, and sale of electric energy, and the manufacture and sale of ice through its 2 operating divisions in eastern Texas. In the First Division, or Jacksonville District, the Em- ployer operates, on a regular basis, 1 power plant located at Jackson- ville, Texas, and 4 ice plants located at Jacksonville, Rush, Alto, and Troup, Texas. In the Second Division, or Mexia-Marlin District, it .operates, on a stand-by basis, 3 power plants located at Mexia, Marlin, and Rosebud, Texas, and 3 ice plants located at Marlin, Rosebud, and Mart, Texas.2 The Employer also owns 2 other ice plants in the Mexia- Marlin District that are leased to independent operators. We are here concerned only with the Jacksonville District. This district comprises substantially the same physical properties and operations that for- merly were owned by Gulf Public Service Company, over which the Board has asserted jurisdiction.' The Jacksonville District services approximately 17 cities and towns and the adjacent area near Jackson- ville, Texas. ' The name of the Petitioner appears as amended at the hearing. 2 The two districts are not connected by power lines. The Employer purchases electric energy in the Mexia-Marlin District from the Texas Power and Light Co. D Matter of Gulf Public Service Company, 18 N. L. R. B. 562, enfd. 116 F. 2d 852 ( C. A. 6). In 1941 , Gulf Public Service Company sold the operations involved herein to South- western Public Service Company which , in 1845, sold them to the Employer. 85 X. 4 R. B., No. 27. 153 154 DECISIONS OF'NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD During the 1-year period ending on December 31, 1948, the Em- ployer purchased from concerns located within the State of Texas supplies and equipment valued at approximately $955,000, which the Employer "assumed" were manufactured outside the State. During the same period, the Employer sold to industrial and commercial con- sumers located within the State, approximately 24,400,000 kilowatt hours of electricity, valued at approximately $727,000. The Em- ployer's total sales of electricity during the 1-year period ending Au- gust 31, 1948, was approximately $1,390,000. Among the Employer's consumers are United States Post Offices ; the Western Union Tele- graph Company; St. Louis Southwestern Railway Company; Mis- souri Pacific Railway Company; Houston, Texas & New Orleans Railroad ; Two States Telephone Co.; Gulf States Telephone Co.; Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.; and a number of other companies engaged in interstate commerce and over which the Board leas asserted jurisdiction in other proceedings.4 Likewise, during the 1-year pe- riod ending on August 31, 1948, the Employer sold approximately $246,000 worth of ice, which amount included sales to railroads for use in refrigerator cars. We find, contrary to the contention of the Employer, that it is en- gaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Rela- tions Act.' 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees of the Employer. 3. The alleged question concerning representation; the alleged ap- propriate unit : The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit composed of all employees employed in the Employer's power plant at Jacksonville, Texas, ex- cluding office and clerical employees, the superintendent, assistant superintendent, and all other supervisors. The Employer asserts that the proposed unit is inappropriate, contending that the Petitioner's unit request is based solely upon the extent of its organization, and that, in any event, the only appropriate unit would be district-wide, composed of both the power plant and distribution employees in the Jacksonville District .3 There are approximately 46 production and maintenance employees in the Jacksonville District. Of this number, the Petitioner seeks to 4 These concerns are the Sheffield Steel Company, J. C. Penney Co., Sears-Roebuck & Company, Gulf Refining Co., and Humble Oil & Refining Co. 5 Matter of Central Louisiana Electric Company, Inc., 76 N. L. R. B. 243. 6 The unit proposed by the Employer is the same unit found appropriate by the Board in an earlier proceeding. See Matter of Gulf Public Service Company; supra .. It does not include the ice plants. SOUTHWESTERN ELECTRIC SERVICE COMPANY 155 represent the 4 apprentice boiler operators, 4 turbine operators, and 5 shift operators employed in the Jacksonville generating plant. In addition to the foregoing categories, a maintenance man and the lat- ter's helper also are employed in this plant, neither of whom the Petitioner seeks to include in the unit. All these employees constitute essentially the production department of the Employer's Jacksonville District. They perform the customary duties of their occupations and work under the direct supervision of the chief engineer. The remaining employees in the Jacksonville District, who work outside the power plant, constitute the distribution department; they are concerned primarily with the transmission and distribution throughout the District, of electric energy produced by the power, plant. Although the Employer's normal policy is not to transfer em- ployees from other departments to positions in the power plant, ap- prentice boiler operators frequently are transferred from one plant to another.7 As mentioned above, in another proceeding involving one of the Employer's predecessors, the Board found appropriate a unit com- posed of both power plant and distribution department employees in the Jacksonville District!, Since 1939, the date of that decision, how- ever, there has been no history of collective bargaining among the employees in the unit found appropriate therein. Nor has there been any material change in the Jacksonville District operations, the job descriptions or the duties of the employees, or the relationship of the Jacksonville power plant to the distribution department. The apprentice boiler operators produce steam in the boilers which is utilized in the steam turbines operated by the turbine operators, fur- nishing the power that is used to generate electric energy. The elec- tric energy thus produced is controlled at the plant switchboards by the shift operators and channeled to the Employer's customers through the lines and other facilities maintained by employees in the distribu- tion department. In view of the foregoing, it is clear that the employees in the pro- posed unit are, in fact, production employees who differ from the usual boilerhouse group, which we have, on occasion, established as a separate unit in other industries.9 Here their functions form an in- tegral part of the manufacturing process of the Employer's end- 7 Likewise, linemen and maintenance men in the distribution department are assigned temporarily to the generating plant where they perform maintenance and construction work under the supervision of the chief engineer. I In that decision, the Board found appropriate a unit composed of these employees in "Cherokee, Anderson, Smith, and Rusk counties, Texas." The foregoing counties compose the Jacksonville District. ° See Matter of Wilson and Co., Inc., 80 N. L. R. B. 1466, and cases cited therein. 156 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD product, electric energy 10 While they possess varying degrees of skill, it is clear that none has any craft skills.1' Although the Board occasionally has found appropriate, in public utilities, units similar to the one sought herein by the Petitioner,- the prevailing trend of Board decisions concerning employees in this industry has been toward the industrial unit. Indeed, the Board has stated frequently that the optimum unit in a public utility is a system- wide unit .13 In accordance with the findings in our decisions involv-. ing this industry, we do not believe that we should grant a separate unit to the Employer's power plant employees.14 As they do not con- stitute a craft, and as they do not otherwise constitute a functionally distinct group, with interests separate from the distribution employees, we find that they may not appropriately compose a separate unit." As we have held that the unit sought by the Petitioner is inappro- priate for collective bargaining purposes, we find that no question affecting commerce exists concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. We shall there- fore dismiss the petition. ORDER Upon the basis of the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition filed in the instant matter be, and it hereby is, dismissed. 10 Matter of Lynn Gas and Electric Company, 78 N. L. R. B. 3 ; Matter of Boston Con- solidated Gas Company, 79 N. L. R. B. 337 . See, also, Matter of Corn Products Refining Company, 80 N. L. R. B. 362. "Although a 2-year training period ordinarily is required for a boiler operator to qualify for the position of turbine operator , the record discloses that, in an emergency, boiler operators may be promoted to the position of turbine operator after only 2 months service in the former classification. 17 E. g., see Matter of Dayton Power & Light Company, 43 N. L. R. B. 775. uMatter of Lynn Gas and Electric Company, supra, and cases cited therein. 14 See Matter of Lynn Gas and Electric Company, supra ; and Matter of Boston Consoli- dated Gas Company, supra. u In reaching this conclusion we do not rely on our unit finding in Matter of Gulf Public Service Company, supra. The appropriateness of the unit here sought was not in issue in that proceeding . Moreover, no history of bargaining has resulted from the determination of representatives in that case. I