Sun Oil Co. of Pennsylvania

1072 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Sun Oil Company of Pennsylvania and Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union, and Its Local 7-935, AFL-CIO. Case 7-CA-12686 March 25, 1977 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS FANNING AND JENKINS On October 12, 1976, Administrative Law Judge Almira A. Stevenson issued the attached Decision in this proceeding. Thereafter, counsel for Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief, and counsel for the General Counsel filed an answering brief to Respondent's exceptions. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. The Board has considered the record and the attached Decision in light of the exceptions and briefs and has decided to affirm the rulings, findings, and conclusions of the Administrative Law Judge and to adopt her recommended Order. ORDER Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board adopts as its Order the recommend- ed Order of the Administrative Law Judge and hereby orders that the Respondent, Sun Oil Compa- ny of Pennsylvania, Owosso, Michigan, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action set forth in the said recommended Order. DECISION STATEMENT OF THE CASE ALMIRA ABBOT STEVENSON, Administrative Law Judge: This case was heard in Detroit, Michigan, on July 7, 1976. The charge was filed on January 23 and served on the Respondent on January 24, 1976; the complaint was issued March 24, 1976, and duly answered by the Respondent. The issue is whether or not the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, by refusing to bargain with Local 7-935 as the bona fide successor to Central Michigan Independent Oil Workers' Union, Inc. Upon the entire record, including my observation of the demeanor of the witnesses, and after due consideration of the briefs filed by the Respondent and the General Counsel, I make the following: I Most of the facts are not in dispute . Where accounts of conversations between International Project Director Tony Hall and the Respondent's labor attorney, James Hutchinson, vary, I rely on Hall's accounts as his 228 NLRB No. 130 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. JURISDICTION The Respondent is a Pennsylvania corporation which maintains plants throughout the United States including one at Owosso, Michigan, here involved where it is engaged in operating a petroleum storage and distribution center. During the calendar year 1975 the Respondent had gross revenues in excess of $500,000, and purchased and caused to be delivered at its Owosso plant petroleum and other goods and materials valued in excess of $500,000 of which goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 were delivered directly from points outside Michigan. The Respondent admits, and I find, that it is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act. II. LABOR ORGANIZATIONS The record shows and I find that Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, herein referred to as the International or OCAWIU, its Local 7- 935, and Central Michigan Independent Oil Workers' Union, Inc., herein called the Independent, were at material times labor organizations within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. III. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. Facts 1 This complaint alleges that the Respondent unlawfully refused to bargain with the International and its Local 7- 935 as the successor to the Independent and to continue in effect all provisions of its collective -bargaining agreement with the Independent, since on or about December 1975. The Respondent contends that there is no successorship and that it is not obligated to continue in effect all provisions of its agreement with the Independent. The Respondent and the Independent entered into a collective-bargaining agreement effective from June 28, 1974, until March 14, 1977, covering the following appropriate unit, which the Independent has represented since about 1960: All operating employees employed by the Employer in the Owosso District, including warehouse employees, truckdrivers, maintenance employees and garage em- ployees, but excluding sales employees, administrative employees, clerical employees, temporary employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. The agreement contains dues-checkoff and union-security clauses, and has been amended by agreement of the parties to provide additional employee benefits. At material times all 31 employees in the unit were members of the Independent. Its officers were: Donald Cooley, president; Walter Call, vice president; Arthur Graves, secretary; Frank Hildebrant, treasurer until apparently the end of demeanor for trustworthiness was the more impressive and his memory appeared to be more accurate. SUN OIL COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA July 1975, when he was transferred out of the unit and Graves was appointed treasurer by the board of directors, thereby becoming secretary- treasurer; Donald Weekley, board member and sergeant-at-arms; and Jack Sitter, board member. At a regular meeting of members of the Independent held on June 21, 1975, President Cooley announced a special meeting to be held on June 28 for the purpose of voting on affiliating with OCAWIU and, if affiliation carried, on raising the monthly dues to $10. The 21 members present signed for receipt of notice of the June 28 meeting, and notices to the 10 members not present were sent by mail.2 The June 28 meeting of the Independent was attended by 21 members, not all of whom were the same as those who attended the June 21 meeting. OCAWIU International Representative Don Jensen also attended and conducted a 2-hour question-and-answer discussion of various aspects of affiliation, including negotiating with management by local officers, unless help was requested by the International, wage-demand limits of the International, pension plan, and total membership of OCAWIU. The affiliation vote was taken by each member writing "Yes" for or "No" against affiliation on a blank paper, folding it, and dropping it into a ballot box. The votes were counted by two members previously appointed by President Cooley. They announced the count as 21 "Yes" and none "No." Cooley asked if anyone objected to the procedure followed, but no one objected. Cooley then explained that the International per capita tax was $4.85 and asked for a vote on increasing dues from $7 to $10. Another secret ballot tallied 21 for and none against the increase. Secretary Graves, the only witness to the proceedings, testified that International Representative Jensen remained throughout the meeting, as he could not recall his leaving. All those present executed OCAWIU membership and checkoff authorization cards, and Graves testified that all employees in the unit are now members of Local 7-935. On July 1, 1975, Cooley sent a letter and resolution to J. R. Snyder, Owosso district manager of the Respondent, with copies to officials of OCAWIU among others, to the following effect: At a meeting of the members of Central Michigan Independent Oil Workers Union Inc. which, as you know, is the exclusive collective bargaining representa- tive of your employees and is under contract with your company, the membership after special notice of the purpose of the meeting voted to affiliate with the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union (OCAWIU). A copy of the resolution of the affiliation is attached. From this date on the name of the union has been changed to Central Michigan Independent Oil Workers Union Inc. Oil, Chemical And Atomic Workers International Union. All officers and functional leaders remain the same, and we anticipate no change in our day-to-day relationship with the company. The conti- nuity of organization in the local union has been 2 Secretary Graves testified that 22 members attended and that the remaining 9 members were notified by mail. The minutes of the June 21 meeting list 21 members in attendance . James Hughes, the 10th absent 1073 completely preserved and we intend to honor fully all contractual commitments with the company. Please note for your records the change in name of the contracting union. The attached resolution, signed by Cooley, expressed the desire of the membership of the Independent to affiliate with OCAWIU and that its organization, structure, officers, and committees continue to operate and carry out their collective-bargaining functions after the affiliation as in the past, to apply for a charter, to transfer all assets including its collective-bargaining agreement and related pension and insurance agreements with the Respondent, and to continue its relationship with the Respondent "as the duly certified and recognized representative" of the Respondent's employees. Snyder responded to Cooley's letter on July 10, 1975. In his letter, Snyder declined to recognize or bargain with the affiliated local as the representative of the Respondent's employees for the stated reasons that the Respondent had a good-faith doubt as to the actual wishes of a majority of the employees, that the affiliation constituted an attempted creation of a different labor organization, and stated that the Respondent would request the Board to conduct an election. After International Project Director Tony Hall saw Snyder's letter, he telephoned James Hutchinson, the Respondent's labor attorney located in St. Davids, Penn- sylvania, and asked if he was prepared to recognize the affiliation vote. When Hutchinson replied in the negative, Hall advised he was prepared to file an AC petition with the Board. Hutchinson then said it was the policy of the Company to seek a Board election in such matters and it would file an RM petition. The Respondent filed an RM petition July 22 (Case 7- RM-1037), and a Stipulation for Certification upon Consent Election was entered into, waiving the collective- bargaining agreement as a bar. Graves testified that the Union informed management on several occasions that the collective-bargaining agreement would remain in full force and effect whichever union won the election. The stipula- tion was signed by Donald Cooley as president of the Independent, by Tony Hall for Local 7, OCAWIU, and by James Hutchinson for the Employer. The Board election was held on August 22, the choices on the ballot being Local 7, OCAWIU; the Independent; or neither. The tally showed 15 votes for Local 7, OCAWIU; 11 for the Independent; and 1 for neither. Local 7, OCAWIU, was certified on September 5, 1975. On September 8, 1975, the local officers introduced Tony Hall to District Manager Snyder and District Operations Manager Ralph Van Brunt. Hall said that although there had been a considerable change in the bargaining agent, it was the International's intent to carry on in a "business-as- usual" manner. The local officials then discussed with management matters of mutual concern such as bumping and vacations. member, attended the June 28 meeting, from which I conclude he was notified by mail. 1074 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Local officials met with Snyder and Van Brunt again on October 29, when agreement was reached on the bumping matter, as well as on a job-assignment issue. A charter as Local 7-935 was received on December 1, 1975. On December 15, 1975, District Manager Snyder called a meeting with union and other management officials "to discuss several matters necessary to insure a smooth transition" from the Independent to the "new union." Snyder announced that the current collective-bargaining agreement would continue in full force and effect with the exception of two provisions which he said "have been made legally unenforceable" by the change in unions: (1) checked-off dues were being held in escrow and would not be turned over to Local 7-935 unless employees executed new authorization cards; and (2) although the contract required employees to join the "old union," the Company would not require employees to join the "new union" subject to discharge. At the meeting, the Union agreed to obtain new checkoff authorizations, with the proper name of the Company and of Local 7-935, OCAWIU, on them, but disagreed strongly with the Company's position regarding the applicability of the union-security provision of the contract. The Company also announced its intent to inform all employees by letter of this discussion, and the Union voiced its disapproval of sending such letters to the employees. Thereafter, Secretary Treasurer Graves had new checkoff authorizations printed with the names of the Respondent and of Local 7-935, OCAWIU, obtained employees' signatures on them, submitted them to management, and received the escrowed dues, which the Respondent has continued to forward. On December 17, 1975, International Director Hall attended a meeting of Local 7-935 officers with manage- ment and protested management's decision regarding the union-security clause. Hall dictated a proposed amend- ment to the existing agreement to substitute "Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union and its Local 7- 935" wherever the name of the Independent appeared. Snyder refused Hall's request to sign the proposed amendment.3 As the Local had been assigned a number, Hall testified, the purpose of his proposal was to amend the collective-bargaining agreement to reflect the name change and the affiliation. Operations Manager Van Brunt followed up this meeting with a memo to Cooley to the following pertinent effect: We have reviewed your proposed amendments to the current collective bargaining agreement between Sun Oil Company of Pennsylvania and Central Michigan Independent Oil Workers' Union, Inc. which have been made necessary by the results of the election conducted by the National Labor Relations Board on August 22, 1975. For the reasons stated in our letter of December 15, 1975 and as we discussed on December 17, 1975 we agree with your analysts that the National Labor Relations Board certification of your union to replace the former one renders certain portions of the collective bargaining agreement ineffective. Although we agree that some change may be necessary and appropriate we are unable to agree to your proposal as presently stated . In particular, we are unwilling to agree to any new union security clause which would require the employees involved to become members of O.C.A.W. as a condition of employment. Accordingly, we are declining to execute the amend- ments which you have proposed. We will await your further reply. Meanwhile we will continue to conform to our legal obligations in this matter. In January 1976, Hall telephoned Hutchinson several times, asking him whether the Company was prepared to sign his proposed amendment to the agreement. Hutchin- son responded only that he had received a copy of the proposal and was studying it. Finally, in a telephone conversation held on January 15, Hutchinson said he would not agree to the proposed amendment because by doing so he might prejudice the Company's position as expressed in its December 15 letters to the employees. As indicated, all members of the Independent are now members of Local 7-935. Since the affiliation, changes in the constitution and bylaws have been adopted to conform with the requirements of the International constitution. All officers of the Independent retained their same offices in Local 7-935, OCAWIU, except for the departure of the treasurer and the assumption of his functions by the secretary as described above, a change in the designation of the members of the board of directors to that of members of the board of trustees and the addition of two more members, and the abolition of the office of sergeant- at-arms. The Independent's bank accounts have been changed to reflect the ownership of Local 7-935. Other effects of the affiliation were that strikes must be approved by the International president to qualify for strike benefits, the Local can be put under an administrator and its books audited in certain circumstances , it must forward the per capita tax to the International, its funds revert to the International if it withdraws from affiliation, and the Local cannot negotiate for wage rates less than those set by the International's oil bargaining policy committee. The Respondent has not refused to meet or to discuss any subject with Local 7-935, all working conditions have remained the same, and all provisions of the collective- bargaining agreement as mutually amended have remained in force and effect except for the union-security provision. B. Conclusions The nub of this matter, as the General Counsel puts it, is the Respondent's announcement on December 15 that it would not enforce the union-security provision of the collective-bargaining agreement, which the complaint alleges was a violation of Section 8(a)(5). 3 As the Respondent states in its brief, and as the record shows, Hall originally titled his proposal "Amendment to Certification," but corrected it to read "Amendment to Agreement " SUN OIL COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA 1075 The General Counsel contends, contrary to the Respon- dent, that the affiliation action was valid, that "the Charging Party" thereby became the successor of the Independent, and that the Respondent was obligated to continue in full force and effect all provisions of the collective-bargaining agreement including the union-secu- rity clause. At the outset, I find merit in the Respondent's assertion that it had no obligation to bargain with Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union, AFL-CIO. It is well established that an international union and its local are separate labor organizations, and it is clear that the thrust of the affiliation vote was that the Independent should become a local of OCAWIU and as such continue to represent the Owosso employees, and not that the Interna- tional itself would represent them. Similarly, the employees voted in the Board election for representation by Local 7, OCAWIU, and not by the International.4 However, the fact that both Tony Hall's December 17 proposal for amendment of the agreement and the complaint herein included the International along with Local 7-935 as alleged successor to the Independent does not absolve the Respondent from any bargaining obligation it owes to Local 7-935, particularly in view of the Respondent's knowledge throughout of the true import of both elections and its failure to raise this question in its dealings with the unions thereafter.5 On the other hand, I fmd no merit in the Respondent's contention that there were substantial irregularities in the affiliation procedures. It is clear that all 31 members of the Independent, who made up the entire unit complement, received advance notice of the special meeting to be held on June 28 for the purpose of voting on the affiliation question, either in person at the June 21 regular meeting or by mail. It is also shown that opportunity was afforded for discussion of the question, including the impact on the dues structure and other aspects or representation and membership which an affirmative vote would have. I also find that sufficient secrecy of the ballot was maintained in the circumstances described, and in the absence of testimony that anyone could or did see how anyone else voted, even though it did not meet the standards of a Board-conducted election.6 Nor is there a substantial question that any of those voting were not eligible to vote. Thus, all 21 names listed in the minutes as present at the June 28 special meeting appear on the August 2, 1975, Excelsior list submitted by the Respondent in connection with the subsequent Board election except for that of Frank Hildebrant who, as found above, was transferred out of the unit sometime between the elections.? 4 International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, and Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW) [Pierce Governor Co.] v. N.LR.B., 394 F.2d 757 (C.A.D.C ., 1968); General Transformer Company, 173 NLRB 360 (1968); King Radio Corporation, Inc., 172 NLRB 1051 (1968); The Standard Oil Company, 137 NLRB 690 (1962), enfd. 322 F.2d 40 (C.A. 6), The Standard Oil Company, 92 NLRB 227 (1950). 5 See Avon Convalescent Center, 204 NLRB 415 (1973). 6 Bear Archery, Division of Victor Comptometer Corporation, 223 NLRB 1169 (1976). r I assume, in the absence of any information to the contrary , that the Alvin L. Maudlin on the Excelsior list and the Lee Mauldin on the minutes are one and the same. 8 Amoco Production Company, 220 NLRB 1098 (1972). I further find that neither the fact that the notice of the June 28 special meeting was prepared before the members voted on June 21 to hold it, the presence of International Representative Jensen at the June 28 meeting, nor the fact that no one spoke in opposition indicates that the affiliation vote was stage managed, or constituted a raid, by OCAWIU, in all the circumstances. Of particular significance in this respect is the failure of any member to voice objection to the proceedings even though invited to do so by the presiding officer, or to take any pertinent action opposed to affiliation.8 Accordingly, I fmd that the procedures were not so lax nor so "substantially irregular" as to negate the validity of the affiliation vote, and that the vote accurately reflected the uncoerced view of a majority of the members of the Independent (as well as a majority of the employees in the unit),9 and it is well established that such a majority of those voting is binding over all.10 The record also shows that officers of the Independent retained their offices and continued to perform the same functions under the same or similar titles, with the addition only of two members of the board of trustees; that the assets of the Independent have been transferred to Local 7-935; that all members of the Independent have trans- ferred their allegiance to Local 7-935 as demonstrated by the testimony that they have signed membership cards (even though no risk to their jobs was entailed in their not doing so in view of the Respondent's refusal to continue enforcement of the union-security provision); and that the bargaining relationship between the employees and the Respondent underwent no change of consequence, as Cooley's July 1 letter to the Respondent indicated would be the case. Accordingly, I fmd that the Independent did complete and perfect its affiliation with Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union under the name of Local 7- 935, which became the successor and continuation of the Independent, entitled to the same recognition and bargain- ing obligation owed by the Respondent to the Indepen- dent.11 I interpret the Board's decisions in Amoco Production Company, supra; The Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Memphis, 218 NLRB No. 129 [vacated November 28, 1975]; and Bernard Gloeckler North East Co., 217 NLRB 626 (1975), as plainly indicating its view that that obligation extends to the continuation in full force and effect of the current collective-bargaining agreement. In view of this recent Board precedent, I cannot go along with the Respondent's otherwise somewhat appealing argument that the converse should be true because the Supreme 9 Bear-Archery, Division of Victor Comptometer Corporation, supra 10 Hamilton Tool Company, 190 NLRB 571, 575 (1971). 11 Carpinteria Lemon Association v. N.LR B, 240 F.2d 554 (C.A. 9, (1956); N.L.R.B. v. Harris-Woodson Company Inc., 179 F.2d 720 (C.A. 4); Continental Oil Company v. N.LR.B., 113 F.2d 473 (C.A. 10); Amoco Production Company, supra,• Pearl Bookbinding Company, Inc., 206 NLRB 834 (1973). I am aware of N.L.R.B. v. Bernard Gloeckler North East Company, 540 F.2d 197 (C.A. 3 (1976); American Bridge Division, United States Steel Corporation v. N.LR.B., 457 F.2d 660 (C.A. 3, 1972), and J. W. Dickey, formerly d/b/a Ohio Hoist and Mfg. Co. v. N L.R.B., 217 F.2d 652 (C.A. 6), in which these two courts of appeals reversed the Board in cases somewhat similar to the one we have here. However, I am required to follow the Board. Iowa Beef Packers, Inc, 144 NLRB 615 (1963). 1076 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Court has ruled in N.LKB. v. Burns International Security Services, Inc., 406 U.S. 272 (1972), that a successor employer is not bound by its predecessor's collective- bargaining agreement and the Board said, in Kota Division of Dura Corporation, 182 NLRB 360 (1970), that contract obligations "in a successorship situation are, of course, the same in either case." I also note that the Burns and Kota cases both were concerned solely with contract obligations in employer-successor situations, and not in a union- successor situation such as the one we have here.12 I have given some thought to the Respondent's final argument that any obligation it might be said to have had to continue the contract in effect as a result of the affiliation vote must be held for naught after the subse- quent Board election because (1) by agreeing to the election, both the Independent and the Board's Regional Director in effect admitted the separate identity of Local 7-935 and the existence of a question of representation; and (2) the certification of Local 7-935 constituted a resolution of that question and entitled it only to be recognized and bargained with in good faith, and not to the continuation of any contract provision upon which agreement was not thereafter reached. Although no precedent has been cited on this issue either way and I have found none, I agree with the General Counsel that the contention exalts form over substance. Thus, although the cause and effect of Board-conducted elections usually are as stated by the Respondent, the Act does not require the Board to so limit its election function. Nor does the Board's holdings that in affiliation situations like this a Board election is not required.13 The evidence in this case justifies the inference that the union officials consented to a Board election merely to convince the Respondent that the affiliation reflected the true wishes of a majority, and that the Regional Director agreed to it only as an expeditious way in the circumstances to settle a labor dispute. In view of the result of the Board election solidly confirming the Union, its conduct in cooperating with the Respondent's insistence that it "renew its combat via the formality of a Board-conducted election to redetermine the choice already made," 14 and waiving any right it may have had to assert the contract as a bar or to file an AC petition or blocking an 8(aX5) charge at the time , should not in all fairness deprive the Union of any advantage it had beforehand." Accordingly, I conclude that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) of the Act by refusing, on and after 12 The Board has expressed doubt about there being any direct parallel between employer-successorship and union-successorship cases. General Dynamics Corporation, Pomona Division, 184 NLRB 553 (1970). 13 See Bear Archery, Division of Victor Comptometer Corporation, supra, and North Electric Company, 165 NLRB 942 (1967). 14 North Electric Company, supra 15 For similar reasons, I find that Local 7-935 President Cooley's signature on the Stipulation for Consent Election as president of the Independent did not compromise the affiliation, or establish a schism or continued viability of the Independent. Accord, New England Foundry Corporation, 192 NLRB 785, fn. 5 (1971). As none of the above-discussed factors were present in Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company v. N.LR.B., 313 U.S. 146 (1941); Modine Manufacturing Company v. Grand Lodge International Association of Machinists et al , 216 F.2d 326 (C.A. 6); Dow Chemical Company, 186 NLRB 372 (1970), or American Seating Co, 106 NLRB 250 (1953), relied on by the Respondent, those cases are inapposite. 16 Contrary to the General Counsel's contention, I make no finding that December 15, 1975, to continue in full force and effect with Local 7-935, OCAWIU, as the legal successor to the Independent, all the provisions of the 1974-77 collective- bargaining agreement, including the union-security provi- sion, as alleged in the complaint.16 IV. REMEDY In order to effectuate the policies of the Act, I recommend that the Respondent be ordered to cease and desist from the unfair labor practices found and from any like or related unfair labor practices. I shall also recommend that the Respondent, upon request of Local 7-935, OCAWIU, continue in full force and effect the collective-bargaining agreement originally entered into by Local 7-935's predecessor and the Respondent as amended by agreement, and comply with the provisions thereof, including the union-security provi- sion. Upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law and the entire record, and pursuant to Section 10(c) of the Act, I hereby issue the following recommended: ORDER 17 The Respondent, Sun Oil Company of Pennsylvania, Owosso, Michigan, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall: 1. Cease and desist from: (a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Local 7-935, Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, as the exclusive representative of the following appropriate unit: All operating employees employed in the Owosso District, including warehouse employees, truckdrivers, maintenance employees and garage employees, but excluding sales employees, administrative employees, clerical employees, temporary employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. (b) In any like or related manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of their rights under Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to effectuate the policies of the Act: (a) Upon request, recognize and bargain with Local 7- 935, OCAWIU, and continue in full force and effect the the Respondent has acted in bad faith. There is no such allegation in the complaint, and the case has not been litigated on that basis. Moreover, although the Respondent is found to have committed a similar violation at its Clermont, Indiana, terminal (see Sun Oil Company of Pennsylvania, Case 25-CA-7676, in which case a decision is issued today [228 NLRB 10631), and there is no merit in the Respondent 's contention that the Union waived its right to the continuance in effect of the contract by proposing amendments to reflect the name change, I note , on the other hand, that the Respondent has continued to meet and discuss grievances and other matters of contract administration. Its insistence that new checkoff authorizations be submitted was proper in the circumstances. IT In the event no exceptions are filed as provided by Sec. 102.46 of the Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, the findings, conclusions, and recommended Order herein shall, as provided in Sec. 102.48 of the Rules and Regulations, be adopted by the Board and become its findings, conclusions, and Order, and all objections thereto shall be deemed waived for all purposes. SUN OIL COMPANY 1974-77 collective-bargaining agreement originally entered into by the Respondent and the predecessor of Local 7-935 as amended by agreement and comply with the provisions thereof, including the union-security provision. (b) Post at its terminal in Owosso , Michigan, copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix." 18 Copies of said notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Region 7, after being duly signed by an authorized representative of the Respondent, shall be posted by the Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in conspicuous places, including all places where notices to employees are customarily posted . Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respondent to insure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 7, in writing, within 20 days from the date of this Order, what steps the Respondent has taken to comply herewith. 18 In the event that this Order is enforced by a Judgment of a United States Court of Appeals , the words in the notice reading "Posted by Order of the National Labor Relations Board" shall read "Posted Pursuant to a Judgment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the National Labor Relations Board." APPENDIX NOTICE To EMPLOYEES POSTED, BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively with Local 7-935, Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers Interna- OF PENNSYLVANIA 1077 tional Union, AFL-CIO, as the exclusive representative of the following appropriate unit: All operating employees employed in the Owosso District, including warehouse employees , truck- drivers, maintenance employees and garage em- ployees, but excluding sales employees, adminis- trative employees, clerical employees, temporary employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of their rights under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. WE WILL, upon request, recognize and bargain with Local 7-935, OCAWIU, and continue in full force and effect the 1974-77 collective-bargaining agreement originally entered into with the predecessor of Local 7- 935 as amended by agreement and comply with the provisions thereof, including the union-security provi- sion. SUN OIL COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA