Standard Oil Co. of Texas

In the Matter of STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF TEXAS, EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, AFL, PETITIONER Case No. 33-RC-129.-Decided January 19, 1950 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed , a hearing was held. before James R. Webster, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed., Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Murdock]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 ( 6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The Employer, with its principal office in Houston, Texas, is engaged in that State, in the production of gas and petroleum products. Its operations are divided into departments. We are here concerned only with the production department . The latter is divided into two divisions, the eastern division (East Texas ) and the western division (West Texas and part of New Mexico ). The employees of the pro- duction department are essentially field employees . After oil wells ' The hearing officer referred to the Board three motions by the Employer to dismiss the petition. The substance of these motions is that the Petitioner, prior to the filing of the petition herein, and prior to the hearing, made no request of the Employer for recognition as a bargaining representative of employees of the Employer. Since a representative of the latter, at the hearing , refused to recognize the Petitioner as bargaining agent of employees of the Employer, we shall deny the motions. See Advance Pattern Company, 80 NLRB 29. 88 NLRB No. 63. 224 STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF TEXAS 225 are "brought in" by drilling crews, the employees of the production department take over the operations and produce, gauge, and ship oil and maintain the facilities incident thereto. The Petitioner seeks a unit composed of all production and mainte- nance employees of the western division of the Employer's production department, excluding clerical employees, janitors, drilling crews, technical employees, guards, watchmen, professional employees, and supervisors. The Employer agrees that the categories of employees sought by the Petitioner are appropriate, but contends that the unit should be a department-wide one, embracing employees of both the Employer's western and eastern divisions.'- The record reveals no col- lective bargaining history among the employees involved. The office of the western division is located in Midland, Texas, and the office of the eastern division is located at Houston. Both divisions are under the over-all management of the main office in Houston. The job classifications and working conditions of employees in each divi- sion are the same; the rates of pay are identical; and the Employer's benefit plan is the same for both divisions. It would thus appear that the unit, in scope, may be one which includes employees of both divisions. The following factors, however, justify a unit confined to the em- ployees of the western division, (1) the Employer's recognition of the latter as a separate entity for administrative purposes with a separate supervisory hierarchy and a division manager, (2) the geographical separation of employees of the two divisions, (3) relatively few transfers of employees from one division to the other,3 (4) no evidence of interchange of employees between the two divisions, (5) and no history of collective bargaining on a broader basis. In view of the foregoing, and upon the entire record in this case, we are persuaded that a unit confined to employees of the western division of the Em- ployer's production department is appropriate. We find that all production and maintenance employees of the west- ern division of the Employer's production department, excluding clerical employees, janitors, drilling crews, technical employees, guards, watchmen, professional employees, and supervisors as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. Z Of the classifications of employees sought by the Petitioner, there are 88 in the western division and 51 in the eastern division. 3 During the past year there were three transfers from the western to the eastern division. 226 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer , an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days from the date of this Direction , under the direction and super- vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations , among the employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4 , above, who were employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election , including employees who did not work during said payroll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or rein- stated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented , for purposes of collective bar- gaining, by International Union of Operating Engineers, AFL.