Great Lakes Pipe Line Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 10, 1945

64 N.L.R.B. 1296 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of GREAT LAKES PIPE LINE COMPANY and OIL WORKERS
INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 348, CIO
Case No. 17-B-1161.-Decided December 10, 1945
Messrs. Charles M. Blaekmar and E. H. Skinner, both of Kansas
City, Mo., for the Company.
Messrs. B. T. Sargent and Ray Collier, both of Kansas City, Kans.,
for the C. I. O.
Messrs. C. I. McNutt and Leo Quinn, both of Des Moines, Iowa, for
the A. F. of L.
Mr. Angelo J. Fiumara, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Oil Workers Internatiofal Union,
Local 348, CIO, herein called the CIO, alleging that a question affect-
ing commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees
of Great Lakes Pipe Line Company, Kansas City, Missouri, herein
called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for
an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Margaret L. Fassig,
'Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at Kansas City, Missouri, on
July 23, 1945. The Company, the CIO, and Local 90, International
Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of
America, A. F. of L., herein called the A. F. of L., appeared and par-
ticipated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to
examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bear-
ing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties
were afforded an opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Great Lakes Pipe Line Company, a Delaware corporation with its
principal office located in Kansas City, Missouri, is a common carrier
64 N. L . R. B., No. 215.
1296
GREAT LAKES PIPE LINE COMPANY 1297
engaged in the transportation of petroleum products. Its operations
are conducted in seven States under tariffs filed with the Interstate
Commerce Commission, and in accordance with the Acts of Congress
applicable to interstate pipe lines. The Company's system is com-
prised of over 2,000 miles of pipe lines, 4,000 miles of wire, and more
than 1,000 miles of pole lines. During the year 1944, the Company
transported in interstate commerce, through its pipe lines, petroleum
products at the rate of 60,000 barrels per day; the estimated daily
value of such production exceeded $100,000.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
11. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Oil Workers International Union, Local 348, affiliated with the
Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admit-
ting to membership employees of the Company.
Local 90, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs,
Warehousemen & Helpers of America, affiliated with the American
Federation of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership
employees of the Company.
111. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
By letter of June 11, 1945, the CIO advised the Company that it
represented a majority of certain of the Company's employees in an
alleged appropriate bargaining unit and requested a collective bar-
(aining conference. The Company refused such request until the CIO
is certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear-
ing, indicates that the CIO represents a substantial number of em-
ployees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning
of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
'The Field Examiner reported that the CIO submitted 32 application-for-membership
eat ds , that the names of all persons appearing on these cards w ere listed on the Coin-
pany's pay loll of June 16, 1945, which contained the names of 83 employees in the unit
alleged to be appropriate by the CIO, and that the cards were all dated dui mg May and
June 1945
The Field Examiner further reported that the A F of L submitted a notarized list of
members containing 14 names of employees in the unit alleged by it to he appropriate
There are appioxuuatel, 30 employees in the unit sought by the A. F of L
The Trial Examiner reported at the hearing, that the CIO submitted 2 additional
application-fon-membership cards, both dated July 14, 1945 , that the A. F of L furnished
14 application-for-menibeiship cards, 12 of winch were dated between March and June
1945, and 2 weme undated, and that the names on the cards submitted by the A F of L
weme the same as those appearing on its notarized list previously fuimshed to the Field
Examiner
670417-46-vol 64-83
1298 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The CIO seeks a unit composed of all operating and maintenance
employees of the Company engaged in its superintendent district No. 3,
excluding telephone linemen, the district clerk, the chief terminal
clerk, and all supervisory employees. The Teamsters, on the other
hand, contends that the appropriate unit is one consisting of all rack
foremen, engineers, laboratory men or testers, rack men, terminal
gaugers, tankcar repairmen, rack laborers, and terminal laborers at
the Company's Des Moines, Iowa, terminal. The Company, although
expressing a preference for a system-wide unit, did not take any
affirmative position with regard thereto.
There are five superintendent districts in the Company's entire
pipe-line system, each being primarily concerned with the mainte-
nance and operation of the properties within its geographic confines.
The Company's operations in its superintendent district No. 3 com-
prise seven stations 2 and two terminals, one at Des Moines, Iowa, and
the other at Omaha, Nebraska. The general function of the station
operators involves the pumping of gasoline and refined petroleum
products, while the terminal employees blend products and prepare
them for shipment. The record discloses that the station and ter-
minal employees, although under separate immediate supervision,
are ultimately under the jurisdiction of the district superintendent;
that there have been some employee transfers between the terminals
and the stations; and that there are employees throughout the ter-
minals and stations of the district who have similar industrial classi-
fications and like duties and interests.
We have recently had occasion to review generally the functional
operations and the administrative organization of the Company.3 In
the face of a contention by the Company and an intervening union'
that only, a system-wide unit composed of all employees of the Com-
pany was appropriate, we found, in accordance with the claims of the
CIO, that the employees of superintendent district No. 2 formed an
appropriate unit. We there pointed out that the "employees engaged
in the superintendent districts constitute well-defined functional and
homogeneous groups," and that "while we are of the opinion that,
ultimately, a system-wide unit will be proper, no sufficient reason has
been advanced for denying a distinct and identifiable group of em-
ployees the right to bargain collectively at this time." Except for
the fact that no issue was raised in that proceeding with respect to
establishing a terminal as a separate unit, the reasoning of the Board
2 Five of these stations are operating and two are closed ; all are situated in Iowa, except
one which is located at Ridgeway , Missouri.
3 See Matter of Great Lakes Pipe Line Company, 56 N. L R. B. 227.
4 The intervening union failed to introduce documentary evidence that It represented
any of the Company 's employees.
GREAT LAKES PIPE LINE COMPANY 1299
in finding appropriate a unit limited to the confines of superintendent
district No. 2 would appear to be equally applicable in the instant
case involving similar employees of the comparable superintendent
district No. 3.
As regards the Teamsters' contention, we are not satisfied that the
Des Moines, Iowa, terminal employees constitute an appropriate bar-
gaining group. Thus, the group sought does not constitute a craft
unit on a divisional basis nor is it a departmental unit with craft
characteristics. Nor does it include all employees identically classi-
fied or performing similar work in the district since it would exclude
approximately seven laborers, four terminal gaugers, three rack men,
and one tester who are employed in other parts of the district and who
apparently perform work comparable to similarly classified employees
petitioned for at the terminal. Finally, the CIO has made a sub-
stantial showing of interest among employees in the broader unit
which includes the employees in whom the Teamsters is interested.
In this connection, we have heretofore held that we customarily will
not predicate a unit finding on the extent of one union's organizations
where organization of the employees by a rival union has been effected
in a broader appropriate bargaining unit.° Consequently, in view of
all these circumstances, we are persuaded that the separate unit re-
quested by the Teamsters is inappropriate 6 and that the more inclu-
sive unit desired by the CIO is appropriate.
There remailis for consideration the specific composition of the unit.
Rack foremen: The 010 and the Teamsters agree to the inclusion of
the rack foremen while the Company takes no position with regard
thereto. The rack foremen are stationed at•the terminals 'and are in
charge of the loading operations. The record disclosed that they are
authorized summarily to discharge any employee for any one of the
following reasons : stealing, sleeping on the job, being drunk or drink-
ing on the job, or smoking on the Company's premises. Moreover,
they are excluded from the bargaining unit established by the Board
for superintendent District No. 2 and from the subsequent agreement
between the Company and the CIO covering employees in that dis-
trict. Under all the circumstances, we find that rack foremen are
"See Matter of Union Switch and Signal Company , 63 N. L R B . 974; and Matter of
lrrstinq/ouse Air Brake Company, 64 N L R B 547
"We are unable to agree with the Teamsters ' contention that a Board election held on,
April 24. 1945, among the Des Moines, Iowa, terminal employees, pursuant to a consent
election agreement between the Teamsters and the Company compels a finding that a unit
of terminal employees is appioprmte Inasmuch as the Teamsters lost the election and
no collective bargaining resulted, the Board, under well-established principles is not pre-
cluded from finding a mole comprehensive unit appropriate Nor do we deem controlling
the fact that another local union affiliated with the same international union as the
Team^tcrs is the bargaining representative for certain employees in the Company's St.
Paul ALnne'ota terminal, following a consent election held by the State of Mlmre§ota
Conciliation Sermice and is presently negotiating with the Company conceuung it contract.
1300 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
supervisory employees within the meaning of our customary definition.
We shall, therefore, exclude them from the unit.
Clerks: The CIO would include the Company's clerks while the
Teamsters would exclude them; the Company takes no position. Some
of the clerks who are employed at the terminals prepare the bills of
lading for orders to be filled, while others check these bills. Clerks
were included in the unit found appropriate by the Board for super-
intendent district No. 2, and also in the subsequent contract between
the Company and the CIO. Unlike its present position, the Teamsters
had, in the consent election held among the employees at the Des
Moines, Iowa, terminal, also agreed to their inclusion. Under all the
circumstances, we shall include the clerks in the unit.
We find that all operating and maintenance employees of the Com-
pany engaged in its superintendent district No. 3, including clerks, but
.excluding telephone linemen, the district clerk, the chief terminal
clerk, rack foremen, and all supervisory employees with authority to
hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the
status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, constitute a
unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Company classifies as temporary employees those who are hired
for odd jobs which usually are of short duration. In those instances
where a temporary employee has worked 60 days in that capacity, it
is the policy of the Company either to place hint on the permanent pay
roll or to terminate his employment. The Company contends that all
temporary employees be considered ineligible to vote but that all enn-
.ployees listed on its permanent pay roll be permitted to vote regard-
less of length of service. The.CIO, on the other hand, would consider
as temporary employees and ineligible to vote all who have not been
listed either on the permanent or temporary pay roll for 60 days. The
Teamsters takes the position that all employees who have been on
either pay roll for 30 days should be deemed eligible. Since it appears
that the expectancy of permanent employment among these employees
is rather conjectural, we shall declare the Company's temporary em-
ployees ineligible to vote.
Subsequent to the hearing, the CIO requested the Board to fix the
eligibility date for voting as of September 1, 1945, for the reason that it
anticipated a reduction by the Company of the work week and an
attendant increase in the Company's personnel, effective September
23, 1945. The CIO argued in support of its position that the -new em-
GREAT LAKES PIPE LINE COMPANY 1301
ployees will not be as qualified as the old regular employees in choosing
a bargaining representative. We perceive no valid reason for predi-
cating a regular employee's right to vote upon his length of service
with the Company. The CIO's request is, accordingly, denied. We
shall use our usual date to determine eligibility in the election.
Although the showing of representation made by the Teamsters is
confined to the Company's employees at its Des Moines, Iowa, termi-
nal, we shall, nevertheless, inasmuch as an election is to be conducted
among the Company's employees in superintendent district No. 3,
accord the Teamsters a place on the ballot with permission to with-
draw therefrom by notifying the Regional Director within ten (10)
days after the issuance of this Decision and Direction of Election.
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec-
tion herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
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, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRIXTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain represent-
atives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Great Lakes Pipe
Line Company, Kansas City, Missouri, an election by secret ballot
shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than sixty (60)
days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervi-
sion of the Regional Director for the Seventeenth Region, acting in
this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and
subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regula-
tions, and our determinations in Section V, above, among the em-
ployees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, %vho were
employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date
of this Direction, including employees who did not work during said
pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid
off, and including employees in the armed forces of the United States
who present themselves in person at the polls, but excluding any
who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been
rehired or reinstated prior to the dale of the election, to determine
whether they desire to be represented by Oil Workers International
1302 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Union, Local 348, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organi-
zations, or by Local 90 , International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, affiliated with the
American Federation of Labor, for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining, or by neither.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above
Decision and Direction of Election.