Sinclair Refining Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 31, 1945

64 N.L.R.B. 611 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS, L. U. 278, A. F. L.
In the Matter of SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY and PLUMBERS &
STEAM FITTERS, LOCAL UNION #185, AFFILIATED WITH TIIE UNITED
ASSOCIATION OF JOURNEYMEN PLUMBERS AND STEAM FSPTERs OF
U. S. AND CANADA, AFFILIATED WITH THE AMERICAN FEDERATION
OF LABOR
In the Matter of SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY and INTERNATIONAL
BROTHERHOOD OF. BOILER'DIAKERS, IRON SHIPBUILDERS, WELDERS
AND HELPERS OF AMERICA
In the Matter of SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY and LODGE #1276,
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, A. F. L.
Cases Nos. 16-R-1242 through 16-R-1245, respectively. Decided
October 31, 1945
Mr. C. J. Sammond, of Corpus Christi, Tex., for the Company.
Messrs. J. W. Null, of San Antonio, Tex., and Eugene Hendricks,
of Corpus Christi, Tex., for the Electrical Workers.
Mr. Jeff Mullally, of Corpus Christi, Tex., for the Plumbers.
Messrs. Clarence C. Rehl and R. W. Mahan, of Houston, Tex., for
the Boilermakers.
Messrs. C. L. Mullholland, of Dallas, Tex., and Henry J. Murphy,
of Houston, Tex., Tom M. Hill, of Corpus Christi, Tex., and E. C.
Yeager, of San' Antonio, Tex., for the Machinists.
Messrs. Lindsay P. Walden and A. R. Kinstley, of Fort Worth,
Tex., and H. C. Graham, Jr., of Corpus Christi, Tex., for the C. I. O.
Mr. Herman Goldberg, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
ORDER
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon petitions duly filed by International Brotherhood of Elec-
trical Workers, L. U. 278, A. F. L., herein called the Electrical Work-
ers; Plumbers and Steam Fitters, Local Union #185, affiliated with
the United Association of Journeymen Plumbers and Steam Fitters
64 N. L. R. B., No. 102.
611
612 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of U. S. and Canada, affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor, herein called the Plumbers; International Brotherhood of
Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders, Welders and Helpers of America,
herein called the Boilermakers; and Lodge #1276, International As-
sociation of Machinists, A. F. L., herein called the Machinists, all
four petitioners herein collectively called the A. F. L., alleging that
questions affecting commerce had arisen concerning the represen-
tation of employees of Sinclair Refining Company, Corpus Christi,
Texas, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations
Board provided for an appropriate consolidated hearing upon due
notice before Lewis Moore, Trial Examiner. The hearing was held
at Corpus Christi, Texas, on June 28, 1945. At the hearing the Trial
Examiner granted a motion to intervene filed by Oil Workers Inter-
national Union, C. I. 0., herein called the C. I. 'O. The Company,
the Electrical Workers, the Plumbers, the Boilermakers, the Machin-
ists, and the C. I. 0. appeared, participated, and were afforded full
opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and
to introduce evidence bearing on the issues. The C. I. 0. moved to
dismiss the petitions. This motion is granted for reasons stated in
Section III, infra. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hear-
ing 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
Sinclair Refining Company 1 is engaged throughout the United
States in the business of refining, transporting and marketing petro-
leum and petroleum products. It operates 10 refineries, employing a
total of 22,000 employees, which are located in Marcus Hook, Pennsyl-
vania; Wellsville, New York; East Chicago, Indiana; Coffeyville,
Kansas; Kansas City, Kansas; Sinclair, Wyoming; Fort Worth,
Texas; Houston, Texas; Sand Springs, Oklahoma; and Corpus
Christi, Texas. Only the Corpus Christi refinery is involved in the
present proceeding. During the past year the Company produced
at the Corpus Christi Refinery 100-octane gasoline and related petro-
leum products valued in excess of $1,000,000, most of which was,
shipped to points outside the State of Texas.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act.
' A prior decision of the Board involving the Company (35 N L. R. B 1145) discloses
that it is a Maine corporation with its principal office in New York City.
SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY
II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
613
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union
#278, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor
organization admitting to membership employees of the Company.
Plumbers and Steamfitters, Local Union #185, affiliated with the
United Association of Journeymen Plumbers and Steamfitters of
United States and Canada, in turn affiliated with the American Fed-
eration of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership
employees of the Company.
International Brotherhood of Boilermakers, Iron Shipbuilders,
Welders and Helpers of America, affiliated with the American Federa-
tion of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership em-
ployees of the Company.
Lodge #1276, International Association of Machinists, affiliated
with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor organization ad-
mitting to membership employees of the Company.
Oil Workers International Union, affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admitting to mein-
bership employees of the Company. °
III. THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNITS
The principal issue to be determined is whether the units sought
to be established at the Company's Corpus Christi plant by the A. F. L.
are appropriate.
The Electrical Workers socks a unit consisting of all electrician sub-
foremen, electricians, instrument men, line men, cable splicers, motor
tenders, and helpers in the Electrical Department, except for electrical
foreman and instrument foremen.
The Plumbers desires a unit composed of "pipe-fitters, welders,
fabricators, and their apprentices-all pipe hanger work, trap men,
pipe instruments, piping of pumps, pipe threading machines and all
other miscellaneous pipe work, except the clerical workers."
The Boiler Makers wishes a unit composed of all employees engaged
in duties concerning tanks, boilers, bubble-towers, separators, heat
exchangers, and all miscellaneous work pertaining to boilers and tanks,
except for clerical workers.
The Machinists asks for a unit of all machinists in the machine shop,
maintenance machinists, automotive and truck mechanics, tool crib
attendants, bolt threader operators and machinists' helpers, except
for foreman, supervisory and clerical employees and all other em-
ployees not employed in the machinist department.
Contrary to the position of the A. F. L., both the C. I. O. and the
Company contend that a single comprehensive unit of all production
614 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and maintenance workers employed at all the Company's operations
throughout the United States is appropriate because of the long his-
tory of collective bargaining predicated upon such a grouping.
In 1934 the Company and International Association of Oil Field,
Gas Well and Refinery Workers, A. F. of L., which subsequently be-
came the Oil Workers International Union, C. I. 0., the intervenor in
this proceeding, entered into a bargaining agreement covering the
Company's hourly-paid employees in all its operations, exclusive, of
supervisory and clerical personnel. Each year thereafter the Company
continued to recognize the C. I. O. on the same Nation-wide basis pur-
suant to collective agreements.2 The last agreement between the par-
ties was executed on June 1, 1945. Negotiations for all contracts have
always been held between the Company's central representatives and
the C. I. O.'s negotiating committee,3 at the Company's principal
office located in New York City. From October 15, 1942, until June
23, 1945, the C. I. O. has treated with the Company's central repre-
sentatives under the Nation-wide agreements concerning approxi-
mately 630 complaints. These complaints originated at all the Com-
pany's refineries ,tnd included those of craft employees. The record
also discloses that in accordance with the national agreements, dis-
putes concerning wages were handled on a national scale and presented
as such to the War Labor Board. Pursuant to the terms of the Nation-
wide agreements, Local Workmen's Committees have entered into sup-
plementary contracts with local management. Such agreements have
merely encompassed matters of an essentially local character and have
implemented the basic scheme of bargaining on a Nation-wide basis.
Since at least 1942 the Nation-wide contracts have provided that
their terms are to embrace employees of new properties which the
Company might acquire. In December 1942 the Company obtained
the stock of the Terminal Refining Corporation, which operated a
small refinery at Corpus Christi, Texas, and became the legal owner of
this property, now known as the Company's Corpus Christi plant.
Under the 1942'Nation-wide contract the 15 employees at the Corpus
2 It appears that, since 1934, all agreements have provided for a checkoff of union dues.
Provisions for maintenance of membership and the local handling of certain matters were
included in the contracts since at least 1944.
8 For the employees of the Company the C. I 0 has established about 34 locals located
throughout the Company's operations The C. I. O. has also created a National Council
whose function it is to handle all affairs arising under the existing national agreement
with the Company, prepare amendments to the agreement to be presented to the Company,
and to consider the most effective methods of bargaining with the Company. The record
discloses that the Council holds regularly scheduled meetings every 3 months The Coun-
cil is composed of one or two members from each local union These members, in turn
elect the officers of the Council. The Council recommends the minimum number of persons
to comprise the committee which negotiates contracts with management However, the
locals apparently designate the committeemen, and may send to the negotiating meetings
with the Company as many of them as they desire above the minimum fixed by the
National Council.
SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY 615
Christi plant were automatically covered by its terms. However, the
C. I. 0., in fact, represented 12 of these employees. From December
1942 until June 1944, the Company enlarged and improved the Corpus
Christi plant in order to produce 100-octane gasoline; the last unit of
this plant was completely staffed and placed in operation on June 22,
1944.' The plant's complement of employees has gradually increased
until there are now approximately 325 production and maintenance
workers.5 Throughout this period of expansion the C. I. O. has repre-
sented a majority of the production and maintenance employees.6 In
view of these facts, it is obvious that the A. F. L.'s contention that the
employees at the Corpus Christi plant iN ere blanketed within the
Nation-wide unit without their "voice or vote" is without merit.
The A. F. L. seems to assert that the craft groups it seeks have main-
tained their separate identity, basing this assertion upon the fact that
the Machinists, the Electrical Workers, and the Plumbers, filed peti-
tions in previous representation cases with the Board's Regional
Office.7 Apparently, however, the employees sought by the A. F. L.
have acquiesced in the form of bargaining initiated by the C. I. 0.,
and have sanctioned their representation by the C. I. O. Thus, on or
about September 28, 1944, when negotiations were commenced with
local management of the Corpus Christi plant for a "Local Supple-
mental Agreement," employees in the electrical department whom the
Electrical Workers desires to represent submitted to the Local Work-
men's Committee a statement as to the type of seniority they wished.
This statement was later made part of the demands presented by the
local to the Company. Employees in the pipe department whom the
Plumbers desires to represent, employees in the instrument department
in whom the Electrical Workers is interested, and employees in the
boiler shop sought by the Boilermakers, served as representatives on
the committee which negotiated the "Local Supplemental Agree-
ment." 8 Moreover, employees claimed by the Boilermakers utilized
the C. I. O.'s grievance procedure and called upon the C. I. O. to handle
grievances for them on November 24, 1944, December 8, 1944, January
4Insofar as the craft groups here sought are concerned , it appears that in 1943 the
Company did not operate a machine shop , that in the early part of 1944 it started hiring
machinists and setting up its machine shop, and that machine shop maintenance work did
not begin until the last unit of the plant was completed in June 1944.
5 On October 15, 1944, the Company had in its employ approximately 355 production
and maintenance workers.
The record discloses that , although the Company does not require any proof of majority
representation among the employees of the properties acquired during the term of any
agreement because such properties are automatically covered, the Company nevertheless
demands that the C . I. O. prove its majority status among the employees of such properties
before entering into negotiations for a renewal of the contractual relationship.
° The Machinists filed its petition on April 21, 1944 , the Electrical Workers filed its
petition on October 7, 1944 ; and the Plumbers filed its petition on October 23, 1944 These
petitions were administratively dismissed.
8 This contract was executed on December 2, 1944.
616 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
5, 1945, and January 19 , 1945. Likewise , employees desired by the
Electrical Workers submitted to the C. I. O. grievances which were
handled by the C. I. O. on September 5, 1944, September 19, 1944,
October 4, 1944, and February 8,1945. And on September 2, 1944 and
November 24, 1944, the C. I. O. processed grievances which arose in the
machine shop, whose employees are sought by the Machinists.
We are not convinced , considering the entire record, that the units
desired should be carved from the established Nation-wide production
and maintenance unit. There has been an effective history of collec-
tive bargaining with the Company on the basis of this unit, including
the Corpus Christi employees, for amajority of such employees have
at all times been represented by the C. I. O. Furthermore, the various
craft groups sought have apparently acquiesced in the exclusive agency
of the C. I. O. and the unit which underlay the C. I. O.'s collective bar-
gaining. We consequently find that the units sought by the A. F. L.
are inappropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, and we
shall dismiss the petitions filed herein.
IV. THE ALLEGED QUESTIONS CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
Inasmuch as we have concluded in Section III above , that the bar-
gaining units sought to be established by the petitions are not appro-
priate for the purposes of collective bargaining , we find that no ques-
tions affecting commerce have arisen concerning the representation of
employees of the Company within the meaning of Section 9 (c) of the
National Labor Relations Act.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and the entire record
in the case, the Board hereby orders that the petitions for investigation
and certification of representatives of employees of Sinclair Refining
Company, Corpus Christi, Texas, filed by International Brotherhood
of Electrical Workers, L. U. 278, A. F. L. (Case No. 16-R-1242) ;
Plumbers and Steam Fitters, Local Union #185, affiliated with the
United Association of Journeymen Plumbers and Steam Fitters of
United States and Canada , affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor ( Case No. 16-R-1243 ) ; International Brotherhood of Boiler-
makers, Iron Shipbuilders, Welders and Helpers of America (Case
No. 16-R-1244 ) ; and Lodge #1276, International Association of Ma-
chinists, A. F. L. (Case No. 16-R-1245), be, and they hereby are,
dismissed.