The Texas Co.

In the Matter of THE TEXAS COMPANY, PORT NECHES REFINERY and OIL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL No. 228, AFFILIATED WITH THE C. I. O. Case No. R-0173-Decided February 14, 1941 Jurisdiction : oil refining industry. Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question : refusal to accord union recognition ; elections necessary. Units Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : single or separate units compris- ing: (1) all employees including certain subforemen, but excluding office, clerical, and supervisory employees, foremen, first-aid employees, engineers, the power engineer, chief chemist, research chemists, and chemists; and (2) the machinists, helpers, specialists, and apprentices ; determination of, de- pendent upon elections. Mr. William R. Consedine, for the Board. Mr. 0. J. Dor•2vin, of New York City, and Mr. J. H. Pipkin, of Houston, Texas, for the Company. Mr. Mike Daughtrii, of Beaumont, Texas, for the Union. Mr. L. G. Fenn, of Dallas, Texas, for the I. A. M. Mr. Louis Cokin, of counsel to the Board. DECISION DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS AND ORDER VACATING DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE On July 22 and August 9, 1940, respectively, Oil Workers Inter- national Union, Local No. 228, affiliated with the C. I. 0., herein called Local 228, filed with the Regional Director for the Sixteenth Region (Fort Worth, Texas) a petition and an amended petition alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees at the Port Neches Refinery of The Texas Company, Port Neches, Texas, herein called the Company, and re- questing an investigation and certification of representatives pur- suant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On November 9, 1940, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, acting pursuant to Section 29 N. L. R B , No. 108. 623 624 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section 3, of National Labor Rela- lions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon due notice. On November 12, 1940, the Regional Director issued a notice of hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and Local 228. On November 20, 1940, the Regional Director issued an order extending date of hearing. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held on November 29, 1940, at Beaumont, Texas , before William P. Webb, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board . The Board and the Company were represented by counsel , Local 228 by its rep- resentative ; all participated in the hearing . Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses , and to introduce evi- dence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties . During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner made several rulings on motions and on objections to the admission of evidence . The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no. prejudicial errors were committed . The rulings are hereby affirmed. On December 16, 1940, the Board issued a Decision and Direction of Election in this proceeding.' On January 3, 1941, International Association of Machinists, herein called the I. A. M., notified tha Board that it did , not receive any notice of this proceeding , that it claimed to represent all machinists, helpers and specialists at the Port Neches Refinery of the Company, and that such employees were included within the unit found by the Board to be appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining in its Decision and Direction of Election. On January 8, 1941 , the Board, acting pursuant to Article III, Section 8 , of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regula- tions-Series 2, as amended , ordered the record in this proceeding reopened for the purpose of taking testimony as to the claims of the I. A. M. and ordered the directed election postponed indefinitely. On January 14, 1941 , the Regional Director issued a notice of further hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Com- pany, Local 228, and the I. A. M. Pursuant to such notice, a further hearing was held on January 18, 1941, at Beaumont , Texas, 'before Paul Barker, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Company was represented by counsel , Local 228 and the I. A. M. by their representatives ; all participated in the hearing . Full oppor- tunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was afforded all parties. At the commencement of the hearing, the Trial Examiner granted a. motion to intervene filed by the I. A. M. - 11 1 28 N. L R B. 590. THE TEXAS COMPANY, PORT NECHES REFINERY 625 The Board hereby vacates and supersedes its Decision and Direc- tion of Election issued on December 16, 1940, with the Decision, Direc- tion of Elections and Order-Vacating Decision and Direction of Election herein. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY The Texas Company is a Delaware corporation having its prin- cipal offices in New York City and Houston, Texas. It is the prin- cipal subsidiary, wholly owned, of The Texas Corporation, through which it is affiliated with some 50 other corporations, all constituting a world-wide organization for the production, transportation, refining and marketing of crude oil and the products thereof, and for inciden- tal businesses. The Port Neches Refinery of the Company, with which, we are here concerned, has a daily crude oil capacity in excess of 25,000 barrels. Most of the crude oil is obtained from the States of Texas and Louisiana. Part of it is imported from Venezuela by tanker. Be- sides the crude oil, the principal raw materials utilized are felt, sheet steel, wood staves, slate, paper, and nails. All these materials are procured from sources outside the State of Texas. The prin- cipal finished products at the Port Neches Refinery are asphalt and asphalt roofing, as well as steel barrels, wood barrels, and drums used as containers therefor. A major portion of the Port Neches Re- finery's finished products is transported to points outside the State of Texas by tanker and freighter and by tankcar and boxcar. The unused portion of the crude oil at the Port Neches Refinery, after the primary distillation of the process is completed, is pumped to the Port Arthur Refinery of the Company for further processing. In finished form, a substantial percentage of all crude oil distillates pumped to the Port Arthur Refinery eventually reach a destination outside the State of Texas. The Port Neches Refinery employs approximately 500 employees. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Oil workers International Union, Local No. 228, is a labor organiza-- tion affiliated -with the Congress of Industrial Organizations. It admits to membership employees at the Port Neches Refinery of the Company. International Association of Machinists is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor. It admits to membership employees at the Port Neches Refinery of the Company. 626 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION On July 2, 1940, Local 228 wrote to the Company claiming to repre- sent a majority of the employees at the Port Neches Refinery and re- questing exclusive recognition. On July 12, 1940, the Company denied this request. The record shows that Local 228 and the I.' A. M. each represents a substantial number of employees in the unit which each-alleges is appropriate.2 We find that a question has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION UPON COMMERCE We find that the question concerning representation which has arisen, occurring in connection with the operations of the Company described in Section I above, has a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and tends to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. V. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT Both labor organizations and the Company are agreed that apart from machinists, helpers, specialists, and apprentices- in the machine shop, the appropriate unit properly includes all employees at the Port Neches Refinery of the Company, 'including certain subfore- men," but excluding office, clerical, supervisory employees, foremen, first-aid employees, engineers, the power engineer, chief chemist, research chemists, and chemists. The sole dispute concerns the status of the machinists, helpers, specialists, and apprentices in the machine shop of the Company, Local 228 desiring their inclusion in the unit, and the I. A. M. their exclusion. The Company took no position with respect to these employees. At the further hearing held on January 18, 1941, Local 228, while adhering to its above-mentioned contention with respect to the unit, stated that it had no objection to a separate election for the machine shop employees as urged by the I. A. M., to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Local 228 or the I. A. M. 2 A Field Examiner's statement shows that 292 employees of the Company have signed authorization cards in the Union. There are approximately 405 employees in the alleged appropriate unit. A statement of the Trial Examiner during the reopened hearing shows that 17 employees in the unit alleged to be appropriate by the I A M had signed mem- bership application cards in the I. A. M. There are approximately 17 employees In the unit urged by the I A M. 8 These subforemen are F G. Watson , J. B. McMinn, J. A Horton, B L. Rhodes, W. C. Reed, Mark Lee, H. B. Bickers , E. A. Guidry, George Stef len, S. A. Ritchie, V. Broussard, Lee Depwe, Ivy Wyatt, V. Myers, E. W. Lee, and W. R. Hadley. THE TEXAS COMPANY, PORT NECHES REFINERY 627 Under the circumstances of this case, we find that (a) all employees of the Company, including certain subforemen,4 but excluding office, clerical, and supervisory employees, foremen, first-aid employees, engi- neers, the power engineer, chief chemist, research chemists, and chem- ists, may properly constitute an appropriate unit, with or without inclusion of the machinists, helpers, specialists, and apprentices in the machine shop, and that (b) the machinists, helpers, specialists, and apprentices may properly constitute a separate appropriate unit or be merged in a larger industrial unit. We shall accordingly order that separate. elections be held : (1) among the employees of the Com- pany, described in (a) above excluding the machinists, helpers, special- ists, and apprentices, to determine whether or not'they desire to be represented- by Local 228, and (2) among the machinists, helpers, specialists, and apprentices described in (b) above, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Local 228, by the I.-A. M., or by neither. On the results of the elections will depend the appro- priate unit or units. If the employees described in (a) and (b) above select in the separate elections the same representative they will to- gether constitute an appropriate unit. If they choose different repre- sentatives they will constitute separate appropriate units.5 - VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REYRESENTATIVTS We find that the question which has arisen. concerning the repre- sentation of employees of the Company can best be resolved by elec- tions by secret ballot. The Company stated, that it desired that no election be held in this proceeding until such time as the Supreme Court of the United States ruled on its petition for a writ of certiorari to review a decision of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit enforcing a Decision and Order of the Board dises- tablishing an independent union at the Port Neches Refinery of the Company. On December 16, 1940, the Supreme Court denied the Com- pany's petition." The parties agreed at the hearing that in the event the Board directed an election, eligibility of employees to vote should be determined by the Company's pay roll of November 19, 1940, intro- duced in evidence. We find that the employees of the Company eligible to vote in the elections shall be those in the appropriate unit whose names appear on the Company's pay roll of November 19, 1940, excluding employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause. Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : - 4 Those named in footnote 3 supra 5 See Matter of Capitol Milling Company and American Federation of Labor, 28 N. L. R. B 1221. °Matter of The Texas Company and Oil IVorkeis International Union, Local Nos 367 and 228, 17 N. L R B 843, enf'd as mod in The Texas Company v N L R B., 112 F (2d) 744 (C C A 5), cert denied 311 U S 712 _ 41 3602-4 2-col 20--41 628 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD CONCLUSION OF LAW A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representa- tion of employees at Port Neches Refinery of The Texas Company, Port Neches, Texas , within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) 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 Rela- tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation authorized by the Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Texas Company, Port Neches, Texas, elections by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction , under the direction and supervision of the Regional Director for the Sixteenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations: '1. Among all employees at the Port Neches Refinery of the Com- pany whose names appear on the Company 's pay roll of November 19, 1940, including certain subforemen , but excluding office , clerical, and supervisory employees, foremen, first-aid employees , engineers, the power engineer, chief chemist , research chemists, chemists , machinists, helpers, specialists, and apprentices in the machine shop, and employ- ees who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Oil Workers Interna- tional Union , Local No. 228, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations , for the purposes of collective bargaining; and 2. Among all machinists , helpers, specialists , and apprentices in the machine shop of the Company whose names appear on the Company's pay roll of November 19, 1940, excluding employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause , to determine whether they desire to be represented by Oil Workers International Union, Local No. 228, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations , or by Inter- national Association of Machinists , affiliated with the American Feder- ation of Labor, for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither.