Sun Oil Co. of Pennsylvania

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 25, 1977

228 N.L.R.B. 1072 (N.L.R.B. 1977)

1072 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Sun Oil Company of Pennsylvania and Oil, Chemical
and Atomic Workers International Union, and Its
Local 7-935, AFL-CIO. Case 7-CA-12686
March 25, 1977
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MURPHY AND MEMBERS
FANNING AND JENKINS
On October 12, 1976, Administrative Law Judge
Almira A. Stevenson issued the attached Decision in
this proceeding. Thereafter, counsel for Respondent
filed exceptions and a supporting brief, and counsel
for the General Counsel filed an answering brief to
Respondent's exceptions.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the
National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the record and the
attached Decision in light of the exceptions and
briefs and has decided to affirm the rulings, findings,
and conclusions of the Administrative Law Judge
and to adopt her recommended Order.
ORDER
Pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended , the National Labor
Relations Board adopts as its Order the recommend-
ed Order of the Administrative Law Judge and
hereby orders that the Respondent , Sun Oil Compa-
ny of Pennsylvania, Owosso , Michigan, its officers,
agents, successors , and assigns, shall take the action
set forth in the said recommended Order.
DECISION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
ALMIRA ABBOT STEVENSON, Administrative Law Judge:
This case was heard in Detroit, Michigan, on July 7, 1976.
The charge was filed on January 23 and served on the
Respondent on January 24, 1976; the complaint was issued
March 24, 1976, and duly answered by the Respondent.
The issue is whether or not the Respondent violated
Section 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act, as
amended, by refusing to bargain with Local 7-935 as the
bona fide successor to Central Michigan Independent Oil
Workers' Union, Inc.
Upon the entire record, including my observation of the
demeanor of the witnesses , and after due consideration of
the briefs filed by the Respondent and the General
Counsel, I make the following:
I
Most of the facts are not in dispute . Where accounts of conversations
between International Project Director Tony Hall and the Respondent's
labor attorney, James Hutchinson , vary, I rely on Hall's accounts as his
228 NLRB No. 130
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. JURISDICTION
The Respondent is a Pennsylvania corporation which
maintains plants throughout the United States including
one at Owosso , Michigan , here involved where it is
engaged in operating a petroleum storage and distribution
center. During the calendar year 1975 the Respondent had
gross revenues in excess of $500,000, and purchased and
caused to be delivered at its Owosso plant petroleum and
other goods and materials valued in excess of $500,000 of
which goods and materials valued in excess of $50,000 were
delivered directly from points outside Michigan. The
Respondent admits, and I find, that it is an employer
engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2),
(6), and (7) of the Act.
II. LABOR ORGANIZATIONS
The record shows and I find that Oil, Chemical &
Atomic Workers International Union, AFL-CIO, herein
referred to as the International or OCAWIU, its Local 7-
935, and Central Michigan Independent Oil Workers'
Union, Inc., herein called the Independent , were at
material times labor organizations within the meaning of
Section 2(5) of the Act.
III. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
A. Facts 1
This complaint alleges that the Respondent unlawfully
refused to bargain with the International and its Local 7-
935 as the successor to the Independent and to continue in
effect all provisions of its collective -bargaining agreement
with the Independent , since on or about December 1975.
The Respondent contends that there is no successorship
and that it is not obligated to continue in effect all
provisions of its agreement with the Independent.
The Respondent and the Independent entered into a
collective-bargaining agreement effective from June 28,
1974, until March 14, 1977, covering the following
appropriate unit, which the Independent has represented
since about 1960:
All operating employees employed by the Employer in
the Owosso District, including warehouse employees,
truckdrivers, maintenance employees and garage em-
ployees, but excluding sales employees, administrative
employees, clerical employees, temporary employees,
guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
The agreement contains dues-checkoff and union-security
clauses, and has been amended by agreement of the parties
to provide additional employee benefits. At material times
all 31 employees in the unit were members of the
Independent. Its officers were: Donald Cooley, president;
Walter Call, vice president; Arthur Graves, secretary;
Frank Hildebrant, treasurer until apparently the end of
demeanor for trustworthiness was the more impressive and his memory
appeared to be more accurate.
SUN OIL COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA
July 1975, when he was transferred out of the unit and
Graves was appointed treasurer by the board of directors,
thereby becoming secretary- treasurer ; Donald Weekley,
board member and sergeant-at-arms; and Jack Sitter,
board member.
At a regular meeting of members of the Independent
held on June 21, 1975, President Cooley announced a
special meeting to be held on June 28 for the purpose of
voting on affiliating with OCAWIU and, if affiliation
carried, on raising the monthly dues to $10. The 21
members present signed for receipt of notice of the June 28
meeting, and notices to the 10 members not present were
sent by mail.2 The June 28 meeting of the Independent was
attended by 21 members, not all of whom were the same as
those who attended the June 21 meeting. OCAWIU
International Representative Don Jensen also attended
and conducted a 2-hour question-and-answer discussion of
various aspects of affiliation, including negotiating with
management by local officers, unless help was requested by
the International, wage-demand limits of the International,
pension plan, and total membership of OCAWIU. The
affiliation vote was taken by each member writing "Yes"
for or "No" against affiliation on a blank paper, folding it,
and dropping it into a ballot box. The votes were counted
by two members previously appointed by President
Cooley. They announced the count as 21 "Yes" and none
"No." Cooley asked if anyone objected to the procedure
followed, but no one objected. Cooley then explained that
the International per capita tax was $4.85 and asked for a
vote on increasing dues from $7 to $10. Another secret
ballot tallied 21 for and none against the increase.
Secretary Graves, the only witness to the proceedings,
testified that International Representative Jensen remained
throughout the meeting, as he could not recall his leaving.
All those present executed OCAWIU membership and
checkoff authorization cards, and Graves testified that all
employees in the unit are now members of Local 7-935.
On July 1, 1975, Cooley sent a letter and resolution to J.
R. Snyder, Owosso district manager of the Respondent,
with copies to officials of OCAWIU among others, to the
following effect:
At a meeting of the members of Central Michigan
Independent Oil Workers Union Inc. which, as you
know, is the exclusive collective bargaining representa-
tive of your employees and is under contract with your
company, the membership after special notice of the
purpose of the meeting voted to affiliate with the Oil,
Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union
(OCAWIU). A copy of the resolution of the affiliation
is attached.
From this date on the name of the union has been
changed to Central Michigan Independent Oil Workers
Union Inc. Oil, Chemical And Atomic Workers
International Union. All officers and functional leaders
remain the same , and we anticipate no change in our
day-to-day relationship with the company. The conti-
nuity of organization in the local union has been
2 Secretary Graves testified that 22 members attended and that the
remaining 9 members were notified by mail. The minutes of the June 21
meeting list 21 members in attendance . James Hughes, the 10th absent
1073
completely preserved and we intend to honor fully all
contractual commitments with the company. Please
note for your records the change in name of the
contracting union.
The attached resolution , signed by Cooley, expressed the
desire of the membership of the Independent to affiliate
with OCAWIU and that its organization, structure,
officers, and committees continue to operate and carry out
their collective-bargaining functions after the affiliation as
in the past, to apply for a charter, to transfer all assets
including its collective-bargaining agreement and related
pension and insurance agreements with the Respondent,
and to continue its relationship with the Respondent "as
the duly certified and recognized representative" of the
Respondent's employees.
Snyder responded to Cooley's letter on July 10, 1975. In
his letter, Snyder declined to recognize or bargain with the
affiliated local as the representative of the Respondent's
employees for the stated reasons that the Respondent had a
good-faith doubt as to the actual wishes of a majority of
the employees, that the affiliation constituted an attempted
creation of a different labor organization, and stated that
the Respondent would request the Board to conduct an
election.
After International Project Director Tony Hall saw
Snyder's letter, he telephoned James Hutchinson, the
Respondent's labor attorney located in St. Davids, Penn-
sylvania, and asked if he was prepared to recognize the
affiliation vote. When Hutchinson replied in the negative,
Hall advised he was prepared to file an AC petition with
the Board. Hutchinson then said it was the policy of the
Company to seek a Board election in such matters and it
would file an RM petition.
The Respondent filed an RM petition July 22 (Case 7-
RM-1037), and a Stipulation for Certification upon
Consent Election was entered into, waiving the collective-
bargaining agreement as a bar. Graves testified that the
Union informed management on several occasions that the
collective-bargaining agreement would remain in full force
and effect whichever union won the election. The stipula-
tion was signed by Donald Cooley as president of the
Independent, by Tony Hall for Local 7, OCAWIU, and by
James Hutchinson for the Employer. The Board election
was held on August 22, the choices on the ballot being
Local 7, OCAWIU; the Independent; or neither. The tally
showed 15 votes for Local 7, OCAWIU; 11 for the
Independent; and 1 for neither. Local 7, OCAWIU, was
certified on September 5, 1975.
On September 8, 1975, the local officers introduced Tony
Hall to District Manager Snyder and District Operations
Manager Ralph Van Brunt. Hall said that although there
had been a considerable change in the bargaining agent, it
was the International's intent to carry on in a "business-as-
usual" manner. The local officials then discussed with
management matters of mutual concern such as bumping
and vacations.
member, attended the June 28 meeting, from which I conclude he was
notified by mail.
1074 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Local officials met with Snyder and Van Brunt again on
October 29, when agreement was reached on the bumping
matter, as well as on a job -assignment issue.
A charter as Local 7-935 was received on December 1,
1975.
On December 15, 1975, District Manager Snyder called a
meeting with union and other management officials "to
discuss several matters necessary to insure a smooth
transition" from the Independent to the "new union."
Snyder announced that the current collective-bargaining
agreement would continue in full force and effect with the
exception of two provisions which he said "have been
made legally unenforceable" by the change in unions: (1)
checked-off dues were being held in escrow and would not
be turned over to Local 7-935 unless employees executed
new authorization cards; and (2) although the contract
required employees to join the "old union," the Company
would not require employees to join the "new union"
subject to discharge. At the meeting, the Union agreed to
obtain new checkoff authorizations, with the proper name
of the Company and of Local 7-935, OCAWIU, on them,
but disagreed strongly with the Company's position
regarding the applicability of the union-security provision
of the contract. The Company also announced its intent to
inform all employees by letter of this discussion, and the
Union voiced its disapproval of sending such letters to the
employees.
Thereafter, Secretary Treasurer Graves had new checkoff
authorizations printed with the names of the Respondent
and of Local 7-935, OCAWIU, obtained employees'
signatures on them , submitted them to management, and
received the escrowed dues, which the Respondent has
continued to forward.
On December 17, 1975, International Director Hall
attended a meeting of Local 7-935 officers with manage-
ment and protested management 's decision regarding the
union-security clause. Hall dictated a proposed amend-
ment to the existing agreement to substitute "Oil, Chemical
and Atomic Workers International Union and its Local 7-
935" wherever the name of the Independent appeared.
Snyder refused Hall's request to sign the proposed
amendment.3 As the Local had been assigned a number,
Hall testified, the purpose of his proposal was to amend the
collective-bargaining agreement to reflect the name change
and the affiliation.
Operations Manager Van Brunt followed up this meeting
with a memo to Cooley to the following pertinent effect:
We have reviewed your proposed amendments to the
current collective bargaining agreement between Sun
Oil Company of Pennsylvania and Central Michigan
Independent Oil Workers' Union, Inc. which have been
made necessary by the results of the election conducted
by the National Labor Relations Board on August 22,
1975. For the reasons stated in our letter of December
15, 1975 and as we discussed on December 17, 1975 we
agree with your analysts that the National Labor
Relations Board certification of your union to replace
the former one renders certain portions of the collective
bargaining agreement ineffective.
Although we agree that some change may be necessary
and appropriate we are unable to agree to your
proposal as presently stated . In particular, we are
unwilling to agree to any new union security clause
which would require the employees involved to become
members of O.C.A.W. as a condition of employment.
Accordingly, we are declining to execute the amend-
ments which you have proposed.
We will await your further reply . Meanwhile we will
continue to conform to our legal obligations in this
matter.
In January 1976, Hall telephoned Hutchinson several
times, asking him whether the Company was prepared to
sign his proposed amendment to the agreement. Hutchin-
son responded only that he had received a copy of the
proposal and was studying it. Finally, in a telephone
conversation held on January 15, Hutchinson said he
would not agree to the proposed amendment because by
doing so he might prejudice the Company's position as
expressed in its December 15 letters to the employees.
As indicated, all members of the Independent are now
members of Local 7-935. Since the affiliation, changes in
the constitution and bylaws have been adopted to conform
with the requirements of the International constitution. All
officers of the Independent retained their same offices in
Local 7-935, OCAWIU, except for the departure of the
treasurer and the assumption of his functions by the
secretary as described above, a change in the designation
of the members of the board of directors to that of
members of the board of trustees and the addition of two
more members, and the abolition of the office of sergeant-
at-arms. The Independent's bank accounts have been
changed to reflect the ownership of Local 7-935. Other
effects of the affiliation were that strikes must be approved
by the International president to qualify for strike benefits,
the Local can be put under an administrator and its books
audited in certain circumstances , it must forward the per
capita tax to the International, its funds revert to the
International if it withdraws from affiliation, and the Local
cannot negotiate for wage rates less than those set by the
International's oil bargaining policy committee.
The Respondent has not refused to meet or to discuss
any subject with Local 7-935, all working conditions have
remained the same, and all provisions of the collective-
bargaining agreement as mutually amended have remained
in force and effect except for the union-security provision.
B. Conclusions
The nub of this matter, as the General Counsel puts it, is
the Respondent's announcement on December 15 that it
would not enforce the union-security provision of the
collective-bargaining agreement, which the complaint
alleges was a violation of Section 8(a)(5).
3 As the Respondent states in its brief , and as the record shows, Hall
originally titled his proposal "Amendment to Certification," but corrected it
to read "Amendment to Agreement "
SUN OIL COMPANY OF PENNSYLVANIA 1075
The General Counsel contends, contrary to the Respon-
dent, that the affiliation action was valid, that "the
Charging Party" thereby became the successor of the
Independent, and that the Respondent was obligated to
continue in full force and effect all provisions of the
collective-bargaining agreement including the union-secu-
rity clause.
At the outset, I find merit in the Respondent's assertion
that it had no obligation to bargain with Oil, Chemical &
Atomic Workers International Union, AFL-CIO. It is well
established that an international union and its local are
separate labor organizations, and it is clear that the thrust
of the affiliation vote was that the Independent should
become a local of OCAWIU and as such continue to
represent the Owosso employees, and not that the Interna-
tional itself would represent them. Similarly, the employees
voted in the Board election for representation by Local 7,
OCAWIU, and not by the International.4 However, the
fact that both Tony Hall's December 17 proposal for
amendment of the agreement and the complaint herein
included the International along with Local 7-935 as
alleged successor to the Independent does not absolve the
Respondent from any bargaining obligation it owes to
Local 7-935, particularly in view of the Respondent's
knowledge throughout of the true import of both elections
and its failure to raise this question in its dealings with the
unions thereafter.5
On the other hand, I fmd no merit in the Respondent's
contention that there were substantial irregularities in the
affiliation procedures. It is clear that all 31 members of the
Independent, who made up the entire unit complement,
received advance notice of the special meeting to be held
on June 28 for the purpose of voting on the affiliation
question , either in person at the June 21 regular meeting or
by mail. It is also shown that opportunity was afforded for
discussion of the question, including the impact on the
dues structure and other aspects or representation and
membership which an affirmative vote would have. I also
find that sufficient secrecy of the ballot was maintained in
the circumstances described, and in the absence of
testimony that anyone could or did see how anyone else
voted, even though it did not meet the standards of a
Board-conducted election.6 Nor is there a substantial
question that any of those voting were not eligible to vote.
Thus, all 21 names listed in the minutes as present at the
June 28 special meeting appear on the August 2, 1975,
Excelsior list submitted by the Respondent in connection
with the subsequent Board election except for that of
Frank Hildebrant who, as found above, was transferred
out of the unit sometime between the elections.?
4 International Union, United Automobile, Aerospace, and Agricultural
Implement Workers of America (UAW) [Pierce Governor Co.] v. N.LR.B.,
394 F.2d 757 (C.A.D.C ., 1968); General Transformer Company, 173 NLRB
360 (1968); King Radio Corporation, Inc., 172 NLRB 1051 (1968); The
Standard Oil Company, 137 NLRB 690 (1962), enfd. 322 F.2d 40 (C.A. 6),
The Standard Oil Company, 92 NLRB 227 (1950).
5 See Avon Convalescent Center, 204 NLRB 415 (1973).
6 Bear Archery, Division of Victor Comptometer Corporation, 223 NLRB
1169 (1976).
r I assume , in the absence of any information to the contrary , that the
Alvin L. Maudlin on the Excelsior list and the Lee Mauldin on the minutes
are one and the same.
8 Amoco Production Company, 220 NLRB 1098 (1972).
I further find that neither the fact that the notice of the
June 28 special meeting was prepared before the members
voted on June 21 to hold it, the presence of International
Representative Jensen at the June 28 meeting, nor the fact
that no one spoke in opposition indicates that the
affiliation vote was stage managed, or constituted a raid,
by OCAWIU, in all the circumstances. Of particular
significance in this respect is the failure of any member to
voice objection to the proceedings even though invited to
do so by the presiding officer, or to take any pertinent
action opposed to affiliation.8
Accordingly, I fmd that the procedures were not so lax
nor so "substantially irregular" as to negate the validity of
the affiliation vote, and that the vote accurately reflected
the uncoerced view of a majority of the members of the
Independent (as well as a majority of the employees in the
unit),9 and it is well established that such a majority of
those voting is binding over all.10
The record also shows that officers of the Independent
retained their offices and continued to perform the same
functions under the same or similar titles, with the addition
only of two members of the board of trustees; that the
assets of the Independent have been transferred to Local
7-935; that all members of the Independent have trans-
ferred their allegiance to Local 7-935 as demonstrated by
the testimony that they have signed membership cards
(even though no risk to their jobs was entailed in their not
doing so in view of the Respondent's refusal to continue
enforcement of the union-security provision); and that the
bargaining relationship between the employees and the
Respondent underwent no change of consequence, as
Cooley's July 1 letter to the Respondent indicated would
be the case.
Accordingly, I fmd that the Independent did complete
and perfect its affiliation with Oil, Chemical & Atomic
Workers International Union under the name of Local 7-
935, which became the successor and continuation of the
Independent, entitled to the same recognition and bargain-
ing obligation owed by the Respondent to the Indepen-
dent.11
I interpret the Board's decisions in Amoco Production
Company, supra; The Coca-Cola Bottling Company of
Memphis, 218 NLRB No. 129 [vacated November 28,
1975]; and Bernard Gloeckler North East Co., 217 NLRB
626 (1975), as plainly indicating its view that that obligation
extends to the continuation in full force and effect of the
current collective-bargaining agreement. In view of this
recent Board precedent , I cannot go along with the
Respondent's otherwise somewhat appealing argument
that the converse should be true because the Supreme
9 Bear-Archery, Division of Victor Comptometer Corporation, supra
10 Hamilton Tool Company, 190 NLRB 571, 575 (1971).
11 Carpinteria Lemon Association v. N.LR B, 240 F .2d 554 (C.A. 9,
(1956); N.L.R.B. v. Harris-Woodson Company Inc., 179 F.2d 720 (C.A. 4);
Continental Oil Company v. N.LR.B., 113 F.2d 473 (C.A. 10); Amoco
Production Company, supra,• Pearl Bookbinding Company, Inc., 206 NLRB
834 (1973). I am aware of N.L.R.B. v. Bernard Gloeckler North East
Company, 540 F.2d 197 (C.A. 3 (1976); American Bridge Division, United
States Steel Corporation v. N.LR.B., 457 F.2d 660 (C.A. 3, 1972), and J. W.
Dickey, formerly d/b/a Ohio Hoist and Mfg. Co. v. N L.R.B., 217 F.2d 652
(C.A. 6), in which these two courts of appeals reversed the Board in cases
somewhat similar to the one we have here. However , I am required to follow
the Board. Iowa Beef Packers, Inc, 144 NLRB 615 (1963).
1076 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Court has ruled in N.LKB. v. Burns International Security
Services, Inc., 406 U.S. 272 (1972), that a successor
employer is not bound by its predecessor's collective-
bargaining agreement and the Board said , in Kota Division
of Dura Corporation, 182 NLRB 360 (1970), that contract
obligations "in a successorship situation are, of course, the
same in either case ." I also note that the Burns and Kota
cases both were concerned solely with contract obligations
in employer-successor situations , and not in a union-
successor situation such as the one we have here.12
I have given some thought to the Respondent 's final
argument that any obligation it might be said to have had
to continue the contract in effect as a result of the
affiliation vote must be held for naught after the subse-
quent Board election because ( 1) by agreeing to the
election , both the Independent and the Board 's Regional
Director in effect admitted the separate identity of Local
7-935 and the existence of a question of representation;
and (2) the certification of Local 7-935 constituted a
resolution of that question and entitled it only to be
recognized and bargained with in good faith , and not to the
continuation of any contract provision upon which
agreement was not thereafter reached.
Although no precedent has been cited on this issue either
way and I have found none , I agree with the General
Counsel that the contention exalts form over substance.
Thus, although the cause and effect of Board-conducted
elections usually are as stated by the Respondent, the Act
does not require the Board to so limit its election function.
Nor does the Board 's holdings that in affiliation situations
like this a Board election is not required.13 The evidence in
this case justifies the inference that the union officials
consented to a Board election merely to convince the
Respondent that the affiliation reflected the true wishes of
a majority, and that the Regional Director agreed to it only
as an expeditious way in the circumstances to settle a labor
dispute . In view of the result of the Board election solidly
confirming the Union, its conduct in cooperating with the
Respondent 's insistence that it "renew its combat via the
formality of a Board-conducted election to redetermine the
choice already made ," 14 and waiving any right it may have
had to assert the contract as a bar or to file an AC petition
or blocking an 8(aX5) charge at the time , should not in all
fairness deprive the Union of any advantage it had
beforehand."
Accordingly, I conclude that the Respondent violated
Section 8(a)(5) of the Act by refusing, on and after
12 The Board has expressed doubt about there being any direct parallel
between employer-successorship and union-successorship cases. General
Dynamics Corporation, Pomona Division, 184 NLRB 553 (1970).
13 See Bear Archery, Division of Victor Comptometer Corporation, supra,
and North Electric Company, 165 NLRB 942 (1967).
14 North Electric Company, supra
15 For similar reasons , I find that Local 7-935 President Cooley's
signature on the Stipulation for Consent Election as president of the
Independent did not compromise the affiliation, or establish a schism or
continued viability of the Independent . Accord, New England Foundry
Corporation, 192 NLRB 785, fn. 5 (1971). As none of the above-discussed
factors were present in Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company v. N.LR.B., 313 U.S.
146 (1941); Modine Manufacturing Company v. Grand Lodge International
Association of Machinists et al , 216 F.2d 326 (C.A. 6); Dow Chemical
Company, 186 NLRB 372 (1970), or American Seating Co, 106 NLRB 250
(1953), relied on by the Respondent , those cases are inapposite.
16 Contrary to the General Counsel's contention, I make no finding that
December 15, 1975, to continue in full force and effect with
Local 7-935, OCAWIU, as the legal successor to the
Independent, all the provisions of the 1974-77 collective-
bargaining agreement , including the union-security provi-
sion, as alleged in the complaint.16
IV. REMEDY
In order to effectuate the policies of the Act, I
recommend that the Respondent be ordered to cease and
desist from the unfair labor practices found and from any
like or related unfair labor practices.
I shall also recommend that the Respondent, upon
request of Local 7-935, OCAWIU, continue in full force
and effect the collective-bargaining agreement originally
entered into by Local 7-935's predecessor and the
Respondent as amended by agreement, and comply with
the provisions thereof, including the union-security provi-
sion.
Upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of
law and the entire record, and pursuant to Section 10(c) of
the Act, I hereby issue the following recommended:
ORDER 17
The Respondent, Sun Oil Company of Pennsylvania,
Owosso, Michigan, its officers, agents, successors, and
assigns, shall:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Local 7-935,
Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers International Union,
AFL-CIO, as the exclusive representative of the following
appropriate unit:
All operating employees employed in the Owosso
District, including warehouse employees, truckdrivers,
maintenance employees and garage employees, but
excluding sales employees, administrative employees,
clerical employees, temporary employees, guards and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with,
restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of their
rights under Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act:
(a) Upon request, recognize and bargain with Local 7-
935, OCAWIU, and continue in full force and effect the
the Respondent has acted in bad faith. There is no such allegation in the
complaint, and the case has not been litigated on that basis . Moreover,
although the Respondent is found to have committed a similar violation at
its Clermont, Indiana , terminal (see Sun Oil Company of Pennsylvania, Case
25-CA-7676, in which case a decision is issued today [228 NLRB 10631),
and there is no merit in the Respondent 's contention that the Union waived
its right to the continuance in effect of the contract by proposing
amendments to reflect the name change, I note , on the other hand, that the
Respondent has continued to meet and discuss grievances and other matters
of contract administration. Its insistence that new checkoff authorizations
be submitted was proper in the circumstances.
IT In the event no exceptions are filed as provided by Sec. 102.46 of the
Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, the findings,
conclusions, and recommended Order herein shall, as provided in Sec.
102.48 of the Rules and Regulations , be adopted by the Board and become
its findings, conclusions , and Order, and all objections thereto shall be
deemed waived for all purposes.
SUN OIL COMPANY
1974-77 collective-bargaining agreement originally entered
into by the Respondent and the predecessor of Local 7-935
as amended by agreement and comply with the provisions
thereof, including the union -security provision.
(b) Post at its terminal in Owosso , Michigan , copies of
the attached notice marked "Appendix." 18 Copies of said
notice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for
Region 7, after being duly signed by an authorized
representative of the Respondent, shall be posted by the
Respondent immediately upon receipt thereof, and be
maintained by it for 60 consecutive days thereafter, in
conspicuous places , including all places where notices to
employees are customarily posted . Reasonable steps shall
be taken by the Respondent to insure that the notices are
not altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
(c) Notify the Regional Director for Region 7, in writing,
within 20 days from the date of this Order, what steps the
Respondent has taken to comply herewith.
18 In the event that 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 National 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."
APPENDIX
NOTICE To EMPLOYEES
POSTED, BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively with
Local 7-935, Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers Interna-
OF PENNSYLVANIA 1077
tional Union, AFL-CIO, as the exclusive representative
of the following appropriate unit:
All operating employees employed in the Owosso
District, including warehouse employees , truck-
drivers , maintenance employees and garage em-
ployees, but excluding sales employees, adminis-
trative employees, clerical employees, temporary
employees, guards and supervisors as defined in
the Act.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere
with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of
their rights under Section 7 of the National Labor
Relations Act, as amended.
WE WILL, upon request , recognize and bargain with
Local 7-935, OCAWIU, and continue in full force and
effect the 1974-77 collective-bargaining agreement
originally entered into with the predecessor of Local 7-
935 as amended by agreement and comply with the
provisions thereof, including the union-security provi-
sion.
SUN OIL COMPANY OF
PENNSYLVANIA