Phillips Chemical Co.

In the Matter of PHILLIPS CHEMICAL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and OIL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 39-RC-200.-Decided September 28, 1950 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Clifford W. Potter, 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 Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member panel [Members Reynolds, Murdock, and Styles]. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain employees 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 Petitioner initially sought a union of all clerical employees at the Employer's Port Adams, Texas, plant, excluding the private secretaries to the superintendent and personnel director, and all super- visors. At the hearing the petitioner moved to amend its petition so as to include all clerical employees of the Phillips Terminal Com- pany located at Port Adams. The hearing officer referred this motion to- the Board. Thereafter, in the course of the hearing the Petitioner agreed to the exclusion of C. L. Hooker, assistant personnel director. The Employer, on the other hand, contends that a unit of all clerical employees of the Employer at its Port Adams plant, more particularly identified as its ammonium sulphate plant, is appropriate, excluding however, in addition to the exclusions requested by the Petitioner, the chief payroll clerk, the stenographer to the assistant personnel di- rector, the stenographers to the chief payroll clerk, the PBX and TWX operators, all other employees and supervisors, and the em- ployees of the Phillips Terminal Company. There is no history of collective bargaining for the employees herein sought although the 91 NLRB No. 90. 568 PHILLIPS CHEMICAL COMPANY 569 Employer has engaged in collective bargaining on behalf of units of production and maintenance employees and electricians and helpers at its Port Adams plant. As indicated above, the Employer is engaged in the manufacture of ammonium sulphate. The Phillips Terminal Company is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Employer,' and was organized for the purpose of handling and warehousing material and loading and unloading material from ships, both on behalf of the Employer and the public in general. There are only two clerical employees of the Phillips Terminal Company involved in this proceeding. They work under the direction and separate supervision of R. C. Pitts, who is assistant traffic director of the Phillips Terminal Company. It appears that the Employer and the Terminal Company maintain separate tables of organization and independent lines of supervision. The exact nature of the duties performed by the Terminal Company's clerical employees is not clearly indicated in the record. However, such duties as are now performed were, prior to the Terminal Company's organiza, tion, performed in part by employees of the Employer and in. part by the traffic department personnel of Phillips Petroleum Company 2 at its Houston office. Apart-from some evidence of` interchange of employees on infre- quent occasions, there is little in the record upon which we may base the determination as to the appropriateness of including the Terminal Company's employees in a unit of the Employer's employees. There is nothing in the record, other than the fact of stock ownership, to indicate that the Employer directs and controls the operations of the Terminal Company or that it determines the labor policy of its sub- sidiary. In the absence of evidence of control, we are disposed to exclude the clerical employees of the Terminal Company from the unit sought by the Petitioner .3 Moreover, the Terminal Company is not a party to this : roceeding.4 The Petitioner's motion to amend its petition so as to include the Phillips Terminal Company's employees in the unit sought is therefore denied. Similarly, for the reason that the Terminal Company is not before us in this proceeding, the Peti- tioner's alternative request for a separate unit of the Terminal Company's clerical employees must be denied. ' The record contains testimony to the effect that Phillips Terminal Company is a sub- sidiary of Phillips Petroleum Company. However, the Employer conceded in its brief that the testimony in this regard was in error and that in fact Phillips Terminal Company is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Employer. s The Employer is a wholly owned subsidiary of Phillips Petroleum Company. See Ozark Central Telephone Company, 83 NLRB 258 ; Mt. Clemons Pottery Company, et al., 46 NLRB 714, 780; see also Reeves Sound Laboratories , Inc., 60 NLRB 463. 4 The Vanta Company, 66 NLRB 912, 913. 570 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Supervisory Clerk K. G. Leamon: Mr. Leamon is chief payroll clerk and as such his principal responsibilities and duties relate to the computation and preparation of the periodic payrolls. In the execution of these re- sponsibilities he directs the work of two other employees in the pay- roll department. As part of the function of his office, he also writes agents' drafts and has on occasion furnished the Employer's negotiat- ing committee in the process of labor negotiations with certain wage information. The record establishes that he has the authority effec- tively to recommend the hiring, firing, and disciplining of the two employees in the payroll department. In view of his authority, we find that the chief payroll clerk is a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. Accordingly, we shall exclude him.5 The Confidential Employees Miss M. L. Shattles: Miss Shattles is classified as a typist, junior. She is assigned to the superintendent as a second stenographer 6 in his office. As such, her principal function is to operate the TWX machine located in the office shared by both stenographers. However, the record shows that as part of her duties she takes dictation from the superintendent and handles correspondence which relates to mat- ters affecting the Employer's general labor policies. In addition, she also has substituted for the superintendent's principal secretary in her absence. She has unrestricted access to all files located in the superin- tendent's office. In view of the fact that in the course of the per- formance of her duties she serves in a confidential capacity to one charged with the responsibility of formulating and effectuating the Employer's general labor policy, we find her to be a confidential em- ployee.7 Accordingly, we shall exclude her from the unit. Miss G. F. Marsh: Miss Marsh is classified as a typist, junior, and acts as stenographer to C. L. Hooker, assistant personnel director, who as indicated above, the parties agreed should be excluded. She also serves as secretary to the personnel director in the absence of the latter's regular secretary. In addition to performing her general stenographic and filing duties which require her to handle personnel files, the record shows that Miss Marsh assists in the preparation of minutes of conferences dealing with collective bargaining negotiations, which minutes are of a confidential nature. Under these circum- 5 Phillips Chemical Company, 90 NLRB No. 76. 6 Miss E. W. Threatt is secretary to the superintendent. The Petitioner expressly excludes her from the unit sought and the Employer agrees to such exclusion. 7 Phillips Chemical Company, supra; The Texas Company, 90 NLRB No. 121. PHILLIPS CHEMICAL COMPANY 571 stances, we find that Miss Marsh is a confidential employee." Accord- ingly, we shall exclude her from the unit. Miss M. R. Thompson and Miss R. J,. Thompson: These employees are classified as typists, junior. They are assigned as stenographers to the chief payroll clerk but their principal duties appear to be the com- puting of the Employer's payroll at the Port Adams plant including the office payroll. The Employer seeks their exclusion on the. ground of the alleged confidential character of certain wage and other infor- mation available to them. However, the record does not indicate that they act in a confidential capacity to any company official en- gaged in formulating or effectuating the Employer's general labor policy. We find that their prescribed duties are not sufficient to con- stitute them confidential employees.9 Accordingly, we shall include them in the unit. Miss M. J. Smith: This employee is the PBX operator.1° Her ex- clusion from the unit is sought by the Employer on the ground that as PBX operator she handles many essential calls through the PBX switchboard concerning matters affecting collective bargaining nego- tiations and other matters of labor policy. She is not required to monitor such calls. It is well established that her duties as PBX operator do not make her a confidential employee 11 Accordingly, she will be included in the unit herein found appropriate. . We find that all clerical employees of the Employer at its ammonium sulphate plant at Port Adams, Texas, including the stenographers to the chief payroll clerk'12 and the PBX operator, but excluding the clerical employees of Phillips Terminal Company, the stenographer to the superintendent,13 the stenographer to the assistant personnel director'14 the private secretary to the superintendent, the private sec- retary to the personnel director, the assistant personnel director,19 all other employees and all supervisors 16 as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate-for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this volume.] 8 Phillips Chemical Company, supra. 9 Credit Bureau of Greater Boston, Inc., 73 NLRB 410. 10 As indicated above, the TWX operator is Miss M. L. Shattles , second stenographer to the superintendent. Although the Employer seeks her exclusion as a confidential em- ployee because of her duties as TWX operator , we have excluded her as a confidential employee on other grounds. 11 Phillips Chemical Company, supra. See also Phillips Petroleum Company, 73 NLRB 236; Great Lakes Pipe Line Company, 88 NLRB 1370. 12 Miss M. R. Thompson and Miss R . J. Thompson. IQ Miss M. L . Shattles. 14 Miss G . F. Marsh. 16. C. L. Hooker. 16 Included in this category is K. G. Leamon, chief payroll clerk.