Oil Workers Local 1-591 (Texaco Refining)

OIL WORKERS LOCAL 1-591 (TEXACO REFINING) Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union, Local 1-591, AFL-CIO (Texaco Refin- ing and Marketing, Inc.) and Michael' Daven- port. Case 19-CB-5952 23 February 1987 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERS JOHANSEN AND STEPHENS Upon a charge filed by Michael Davenport, an individual, on 15 September 1986, the General Counsel of the National Labor Relations Board issued a complaint on 22 October 1986 against the Respondent alleging that the Respondent violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the National Labor Relations Act. The Respondent denies that it has committed the specific unfair labor practice alleged in the com- plaint, i.e., that by refusing to accept or give imme- diate effect to a resignation from union membership tendered by the Charging Party, the Respondent has violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act. On 24 November 1986 the General Counsel filed with the Board a Motion for Summary Judgment, with exhibits attached, and a motion to consolidate this case with Case 19-CB-5822. In the latter case the Board has considered the General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment on a complaint al- legation that the Respondent, as well as its parent International, has violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) by maintaining constitutional provisions restricting res- ignations from union membership. The General Counsel asserts in the instant proceeding that the Respondent's answer to the complaint, read in light of her Exhibit 2,1 raises no material issues of fact which require an evidentiary hearing and urges that the Board issue a Decision and Order against the Respondent in accordance with the allegations in the complaint. The Respondent filed a response to the Generale Counsel's motions in the form of objections to a motion to consolidate cases and its own Motion for' Summary Judgment with exhibits attached including its brief to the Board in Case 19-CB-5822. The National Labor Relations Board has delegat- ed its authority in this proceeding to a three- member panel. I Exh. 2 is a letter dated 22 August 1986 from the Respondent's fman- cial secretary to the Charging Party. The letter acknowledges receipt of Davenport's 9 July 1986 request to resign his union membership The letter further states that the request does not comply as to timeliness with the constitutional restrictkon on resignation, the same provision at issue in Case 19-CB-5822. The letter concludes by stating that the resignation could not be accepted and would not be processed until the date provid- ed for by the constitution, namely, 10 days preceding the contract expira- tion date. 5 Ruling on Motion to Consolidate Cases and Motion for Summary Judgment The Board has decided Case 19-CB-5822 and found that the Respondent has violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act by maintaining, a constitution- al restriction on its members' right to resign from the Union. The Board also has ordered that the of- fending provision of the Respondent's constitution, article III, section 2, be expunged. Oil Workers Local 1-591 (Texaco Refining), 283 NLRB 2,2 issued today. The Respondent does not deny that its financial secretary, on union letterhead, sent the Charging Party the letter summarized in footnote 1, above. The Respondent first contends, reiterating its argu- ment made in Case 19-CB-5822, that the provision is lawful. The Respondent therefore argues that it did not violate the Act in refusing to give effect to Davenport's resignation until such time as it met the timeliness condition set forth in article III, sec- tion 2, of its constitution. Because the Board has found the maintenance of this provision unlawful in Case 19-CB-5822, it follows that its enforcement is likewise violative of Section 8(b)(l)(A)' of the Act. Machinists Local 1414 (Neufeld Porsche-Audi), 270 NLRB 1330 (1984); Hearst Corp., 281 NLRB 764 (1986).3 Because there are no material facts in dis- pute,) we grant the General Counsel's Motion for Summary Judgment and, correspondingly, we deny the Respondent's Cross-Motion for Summary Judg- ment. On the entire record, the Board makes the fol- lowing findings. 1. JURISDICTION The Employer, Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc:, is a corporation engaged in the business of re- fining and marketing petroleum worldwide and in the State of Washington. During the 12 months preceding insuance of the complaint, a representa- tive period, the Employer had gross sales of goods and services valued in ' excess of $ 500,000. In addi- tion, the Employer during that period sold and shipped goods or provided services from its facili- ties within the State of Washington to customers outside the State or to customers within the State of Washington, which customers were themselves 2 In issuing this case on this date, we also deny the General Counsel's motion to consolidate Cases 19-CB-5822 and 19-CB-5952 Further, given our expunction order in Case 19-CB-5822 it is not necessary to repeat that order here. 3 Indeed, as held in the cited cases, any restrictions placed by a union on the right to resign membership would be unlawful. See Pattern Makers x NLRB, 473 U.S 95 (1985). ' We find no merit in the Respondent' s denial That its own financial secretary is its agent 283 NLRB No. 11 6 DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD engaged in interstate commerce by other than indi- rect means, of a total value in excess of $50,000. Further, the Employer during the past 12 months purchased and caused to be transferred and deliv- ered to its facilities within the State of Washington goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 di- rectly from sources outside the State or from sup- pliers within the State which, in turn, obtained the goods and materials directly from sources outside the State of Washington. We find that the Employ- er is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. The Respondent admits, and we find, that the Respondent is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. II. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES The Respondent has 'refused to accept or give effect to a resignation from union membership and has also given effect to a constitutional provision restricting union resignations. By such conduct we fmd that Respondent has violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act. Machinists Local 1414 (Neu- feld Porsche-Audi), supra; Hearst Corp., supra. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc., Ana- cortes, Washington, is an employer engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. 2. The Respondent is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 3. By refusing to accept or give immediate effect to Michael Davenport's resignation from union membership and by giving effect to a constitutional provision restricting its members' rights to resign from Respondent, the Respondent violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act. 4. The foregoing unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. REMEDY Having found that the Respondent engaged in unfair labor practices in violation of Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act, we shall order that it cease and desist and take certain affirmative action neces- sary to effectuate the policies of the Act.5 Specifi- cally, we shall order the Respondent to cease and desist from refusing to accept or give immediate 5 As part of the remedy, the General Counsel seeks an order that will include a visitatonal clause authorizing the Board, for compliance pur- poses, to obtain discovery from the Respondent under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure under the supervision of the United States court of appeals enforcing the order. We have concluded that under the circum- stances of this case such a clause is not warranted effect to resignations from union membership. Fur- ther, we shall order the Respondent to notify Mi- chael Davenport that his resignation was effective and to make him whole, with interest,6 for any losses he may have suffered by reason of the Re- spondent's unlawful enforcement of its restriction on resignation. ORDER The National Labor Relations Board orders that the Respondent Oil, Chemical and Atomic Work- ers International Union, Local 1-591, AFL-CIO, its officers, agents, and representatives, shall 1. Cease and desist from (a) Refusing to accept or give immediate effect to resignations from union membership of employ- ees of Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc. (b) Giving effect to article III, section 2, of its constitution which restricts a member's right to resign from the Union. (c) In any like or related manner restraining or coercing employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action neces- sary to effectuate the policies of the Act. (a) Notify Michael Davenport that his resigna- tion from union membership was effective. (b) Make whole Michael Davenport for any losses he may have suffered by reason of the Re- spondent's enforcement of its restriction on resigna- tions as set forth in the remedy section of this De- cision and Order. (c) Post at its business and meeting halls copies of the attached notice marked "Appendix."7 Copies of the notice, on forms provided by the Re- gional Director for Region 19,' after being signed by the Respondent's ^ authorized representative, shall be posted by the Respondent immediately upon receipt and maintained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous places including all places where notices to members are customarily posted. Reasonable steps. shall be taken by the Respondent to ensure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material. (d) Sign and return to the Regional Director suf- ficient copies of the notice for ' posting by Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc., if willing, at all places where notices to employees are customarily posted. 6 See Florida Steel Corp., 231 NLRB 651 (1977) ° If 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 Nation- al 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 " OIL WORKERS LOCAL 1-591 (TEXACO REFINING) (e) Notify the Regional Director iii "writing within 20 days from the date of this Order what steps the Respondent has taken to comply. APPENDIX NOTICE To EMPLOYEES AND MEMBERS POSTED BY ORDER OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD An Agency of the United States Government The National Labor Relations Board has found that we violated the National Labor Relations Act and has ordered us to post and abide by this notice. WE WILL NOT restrain or coerce you in the exer- cise of rights guaranteed you by Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, by refusing to 7 accept of give -'immediate effect to your resigna- tions from union membership. WE WILL NOT give effect to article III, section 2, of our constitution which restricts the right of our members to resign from the Union. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner re- strain or coerce you in the exercise of the rights guaranteed you by Section 7 of the Act. WE WILL notify Michael Davenport that his res- ignation was effective. WE WILL make whole Michael Davenport for any losses he may have suffered as a result of our refusal to accept his resignation, with interest. OIL, CHEMICAL AND ATOMIC WORK- ERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 1-591, AFL-CIO