The Texas Co.

In the Matter of THE TEXAS COMPANY and TEXAS TANKER OFFICERS ASSOCIATION Cases Nos. R-1818 and R-1819.Decided May 20, 1940 Petroleum and Petroleum Products Transportation Industry-Investigation of Representatives : controversies concerning representation of employees; com-' pany refuses to recognize union as sole bargaining representative for employees in two separate units until certified by Board-Units Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : separate units for licensed engineers and licensed deck officers, respectively, employed on company's ocean-going vessels: no controversy as to; masters included within unit composed of licensed deck officers, following previ-, gus decisions in absence of convincing proof to contrary-Election Ordered Mr. D. R. Dimick, for the Board. - Mr. Albert B. Van-Dusen and Mr. Lionel P. Marks, both of New- York City, for the Company. Mr. Jo/in J. Collins, of New York City, for the Association. Mr. J. H. Krug, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS STATEMENT OF THE CASE On January 11, 1940, Texas Tanker Officers Association, herein called the Association, filed with the Regional Director for the Second Region (New York City), two separate petitions, each alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of The Texas Company, New York City, herein called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certification of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On March 26, 1940, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Sections 3 and 10 (c) (2), of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2,'as amended, issued its order consolidating these cases and directing the Regional Director to conduct an investigation and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. On April 15, 1940, the Regional Director issued 23 N. L. R. B., No. 110. 1022 TFYE TEXAS COMPANY 1023 a notice of hearing, copies of which-were-duly served upon the Com- pany, upon the Association, and upon Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association, No. 33, a labor organization claiming to represent employees directly affected by the investigation. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on April 29 and '30, 1940, at New York City, before E. G. Smith, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board and the Company were repre= sented by counsel and the Association by a representative; all partici- pated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and to cross-examine , witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following; FINDINGS OF FACT I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY The Texas Company is a wholly owned operating subsidiary of Texas Corporation; both are Deleware corporations. The Texas Company is engaged in the production, refining, marketing, and transportation of petroleum products. The Company's refineries are, located in the States of Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Kentucky ,•Illi' nois, Wyoming, and Colorado. This proceeding concerns certain employees in the Company's, marine departments. The Company owns and operates through its marine departments 2G vessels, including ocean-going tank vessels and coastal tank vessels, having a total tonnage of approximately 182,000 gross tons. These vessels transport approximately 40,000,000 barrels of petroleum or its products annually. The majority of their voyages are between United States ports in the Gulf of Mexico and United States Atlantic Coast ports and foreign countries. The trans- portation of the Company's products by these vessels is world-wide. On each of the vessels is employed a master, first mate, second mate; and third mate, and a chief engineer, first assistant engineer, second assistant engineer, and third assistant engineer. These are the em- ployees with whom this proceeding is concerned. IL THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Texas Tanker, Officers Association is a labor organization not affili-` rated with any other body. It admits. to membership the licensed engineers and licensed deck officers-employed -by the Company. ' ' -` 1024 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL,LABOR ;RELATIONS BOARD ` rIII. TIHE ,QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION The Association has requested the Company to recognize it as the exclusive bargaining representative for the employees in the units which we find below to be appropriate: The Company has declined to do so until such time as the Association has been so certified by the Board. We find that questions have arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the questions concerning representation which have arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company described in Section I above, have a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and with foreign countries, and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNITS The Association claims that the licensed engineers employed on the Company's ocean-going vessels, including but not limited to chief engineers, first assistant engineers, second assistant engineers, and third assistant engineers,'. constitute a unit appropriate for the pur- poses of collective bargaining, and that the licensed deck officers employed on these vessels, including but not limited to masters, first mates, second mates, and third mates, likewise constitute a unit ap- propriate for collective bargaining. Division of the licensed engi- neers and licensed deck officers into two separate units, to which the Company agrees, accords with our previous decisions in cases in which the same question has arisen.2 We find that a similar deter- mination is proper here. With respect to the unit composed of licensed deck officers, the Company contends that masters should be excluded, on the ground that the master is in command of the vessel. As stated above, the Association desires that the masters be included in the unit. The Company made no showing that masters are properly separable from other licensed deck officers for the purposes of collective bargaining. Masters are eligible for membership in the Association as well as in 'It appears from the record that these are the correct designations. At the hearing the Association referred to the latter three categories as "first engineers , second engi- neers, and third engineers." 2 See Matter of Tide Water Associated Oil Company and United Licensed Officers of the U. S. A., 9 N. L. R. B. 823, 827, and cases there cited. THE TEXAS COMPANY 1025 other labor organizations which seek to represent licensed deck offi- cers.8 Under the circumstances, we find that they should be included in the unit. We find that the licensed engineers employed on the Company's ocean-going vessels, including but not limited to chief engineers, first assistant engineers, second assistant engineers, and third assistant engineers, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure to employees of the Com- pany the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collec- tive'bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act. We also find that the licensed deck officers employed on the Com- pany's ocean-going vessels, including but not limited to masters, first mates, second mates, and third mates, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining and that said unit will insure to employees of the Company the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to collective bargaining and otherwise ef- fectuate the policies of the Act. VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Association did not introduce evidence at the hearing which, will, permit a certification of representatives on the basis thereof. The Board's attorney, however, introduced in evidence without ob- jection a statement of the Regional Director tending to show that the Association represents a substantial number of the Company's employees in each of the appropriate units. The Association asks that elections be held. We find that the questions concerning repre- sentation which have arisen can best be resolved by means of elec- tions by secret ballot. The Company requested that if the Board ordered elections herein, eligibility to vote should be determined as of the date of the Direc- tion of Elections. The Association had no preference as to the eli- gibility date. In accordance with our usual practice, we shall direct that' eligibility to vote shall be determined with reference to the pay-roll period last preceding the date of the Direction of Elections. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire. : record in the case, the Board makes the following: CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Questions affecting commerce have arisen concerning the rep- resentation of employees of The Texas Company, New York City, 0 See eases referred to In footnote 2, supra 1026 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL - LABOR - RELATIONS BOARD within the meaning of Section -9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act. 2. The licensed engineers employed on the Company's ocean-going vessels, including but not limited to chief engineers, first assistant engineers, second assistant engineers, and third assistant engineers, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargain- ing, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National' Labor relations Act. . 3. The licensed deck officers employed on the Company's ocean- going vessels, including but not limited to masters, first mates, sec- ond mates, and third mates, constitute a' unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 .(b) of the National Labor Relations Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby -DintECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining u ith The Texas Company, New York City, elections by secret bal- lot shall be 'conducted as soon as convenient and beginning as promptly as is practicable after the date of this Direction, under the -direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Second Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Rela- tions Board and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and ,,]Regulations: (1) Among the licensed engineers employed on the Company's ocean-going vessels, including but not limited to chief engineers, first assistant engineers, second assistant engineers, and third assistant -engineers, employed by the Company during the pay-roll period last preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who (Ed not work-during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation and employees who were then or have since been temporarily laid off, and excluding those -%vlio between said pay-roll date and the date of the election have quit or been discharged for cause, to deter- mine whether or not they desire to be represented by Texas Tanker Officers Association for the purposes of collective bargaining; (2) Among the licensed deck officers employed on the Company's ccean-going vessels, including but not limited to masters, first,mates, THE TEXAS COMPANY 1027 second mates, and third mates, employed by the Company during the pay-roll period last preceding the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation and employees who were then or have since been temporarily laid off, and excluding those who between said ,pay- roll date and the date of the election have quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Texas Tanker Officers Association, for the purposes of collective bargaining.