The Texas Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jan 20, 1944

54 N.L.R.B. 727 (N.L.R.B. 1944)

In the Matter of THE TEXAS COMPANY and OFFICE EMPLOYEES UNION
#22977 AFFILIATED WITH A. F. OF L.
Case No. 16-R-763.-Decided January 00, 1944
Messrs. Frank L. Wallace and W. R. Moser, of 'Port Arthur, Tex.,
and Mr. John C. Jackson, of Houston, Tex., for the Company.
Messrs. J. W. Park, C. A. Stafford, and A. G. Tomblin, of Beaumont,
Tex., for the AFL.
Mr. J. Elro Brown, of Port Arthur, Tex., for the C. I. O.
Miss Frances Lopinsky, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Office Employees Union #22977,
Affiliated with the A. F. of L., herein called the AFL, alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation
of employees of The Texas Company, Port Arthur, Texas, herein
called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided
for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Charles E. Persons,
Trial Examiner . Said hearing was held at Port Arthur, Texas, on
November 18, 1943. The Company and the Union 1 appeared, par-
ticipated, and were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine
and cross -examine witnesses , and to introduce evidence bearing 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
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
The Texas Company, a Delaware corporation with its principal
offices in New York City, is engaged in the production, refining, and
' A representative of the Oil Workers International Union, ( CIO) Local No. 27, herein
called the CIO , appeared without formally intervening , for the purposes of defining the
jurisdiction of the CIO under a contract which it has with the Company.
54 N. L . R. B., No. 109.
727
728 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
marketing of crude oil and its byproducts . It operates a refinery and
a terminal at Port Arthur, Texas, with which this proceeding is con-
cerned. Approximately 90 percent of the finished products of the
Company is transported to states other than the State of Texas and
to foreign countries by pipe line , railroad cars , and tankers.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Office Employees Union #22977 Affiliated with the American Fed-
eration of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership•
employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Company has refused to grant recognition to the Union as the
exclusive bargaining representative of its employees until the Union
has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
A statement of the Field Examiner, introduced into evidence at
the hearing , indicates that the Union represents a substantial number
of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate 2
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.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
The Union requests a unit composed of all clerical and office workers
at the Company 's Port Arthur Terminal and Port Arthur Works;
including clerks, junior clerks , senior clerks , supervisory clerks, and
comptometer operators , excluding department heads, engineers , drafts-
men, chemists , material checkers on 'the hourly pay roll,' office boys
and girls , and the librarian for the laboratory . The Company has
no objection to the broad unit requested , but desires the exclusion of
numerous employees on the ground that they are supervisory employees
or that their work is confidential in nature. The Union agrees that
the employees hereinafter named in Appendix I, are confidential and
those named in Appendix II are supervisory employees ; and that both
groups should be excluded from the unit. The Union contests all
other exclusions requested by the Company.
2 The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 182 authorization cards, 163
of which bore apparently genuine original signatures corresponding with the names of
persons appearing on the Company 's pay roll of October 31, 1943, which contained the
names of 425 employees in the appropriate unit.
3 These material checkers are included in a unit represented by the CIO.
THE TEXAS' COMPANY 729
Some of the confidential employees named in Appendix I are private
secretaries to executives of the Company who formulate labor policies,
others are employed in the Industrial Relations Department of the
Company and have access to information concerning labor relations.
As all of these come within our usual definition of confidential em-
ployees, we agree with the parties that they should be excluded from
the unit.
The employees listed in Appendix II, although classified on the
Company's pay roll as clerks, senior clerks or supervising clerks, are
in fact heads of their respective departments and direct the activities
of all persons employed therein. We agree with the parties that these
persons are supervisory employees and shall exclude them from the
unit.
The Company contends for the exclusion of all of the employees of
the cashier's department 4 as confidential employees because they work
on the "private" pay roll. The private pay roll contains the names
of all salaried employees in the plant. Since the nature of the con-
fidential information to which they have access has no direct bearing
on labor relations, we shall not exclude employees of the cashier's
department, as such, from the unit.' We agree with the Company,
however, that certain persons ,6 classified on the Company's pay roll
as clerks and stenographers, who work as secretaries to department
heads who formulate labor policies and handle grievances within
'their own departments, are confidential employees and should be
excluded from the unit.
The Company contends for the exclusion of 30 other employees 7
on the ground that they are supervisory employees. These employees
outline the work for small groups of clerks-and are responsible for
its execution. They have authority to make recommendations con-
cerning discipline, transfer, and discharge of their subordinates, an
authority exercised by them in varying degrees dependent upon their
individual personalities. They are paid an average of 10 percent more
than the people they supervise. All" perform clerical work but it is
generally of a special character. Since these employees fall within
our customary 'definition of supervisory employees, we shall exclude
them from the unit.
We find that all clerical and office employees of the Company at
its refinery and terminal at Port Arthur, Texas, including clerks,"
* Appendix III lists all non-supervisory employees of the cashier's department.
5 See Matter of Firestone Tire & Rubber Co . of Calif., 50 N . L. R. B. 679; U. S . Smelting,
Refining & Mining Co , 53 N. L. R. B. 84.
e Listed in Appendix IV.
7 Listed in Appendix/V.
8 All clerks of whatever classification not specifically excluded are hereby included. The
unit also covers those clerks who were promoted to that classification from the classifica-
tion, material checker.
730 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
stenographers, comptometer operators, and employees of the cashier's
department, but excluding department heads, engineers, draftsmen,
chemists, material checkers on the hourly pay roll, office boys and office
girls, the librarian in the laboratory, confidential employees, 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 Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
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 Election
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 Rela-
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Texas Com-
pany, Port Arthur, Texas, an election by secret ballot shall be con-
ducted 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, S°ctions 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the em-
ployees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, who 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
those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause, and
have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election,
to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Office
Employees Union #22977, Affiliated with A. F. L. for the purposes
of collective bargaining.
THE TEXAS COMPANY
APPENDIX I
S. T. Gregory
Irene V. Ahibom
Rose M. Calvert
Raymond M. Davis
E. C. Forque
F. R. Keith
W. W. Butler
Lawrence McCarley
N. A. Romero,
C. M. S. O'Neil
J. S. Carr
Euclid Hudson
J. C. Trahan
Kenneth W. Schultz
Collis M. Williamson
Harry A. Williams,
L. B. Williamson
A. R. Lacy
J. I. Sweeney
Robert Chiasson
R. C. Savoie
John Whitmeyer
Arthur Grote
E. F. Graham
K. W. Schulze
S. A. Lewis
W. C. Robinette
P. H. LaGrone
J. D. Hill
Leslie McInnis
A. C. Sudduth
Elsie Gruetaner
Howard C. Nichols
Jos. A. Willbank
W. E. Scott
APPENDIX II
T. C. Roddy
M. C. Franklin
F. E. Walker
H. R. Chandler
R. T. DeLaureal
C. H. Rayser
APPENDIX III
J. B. Thomson
Stella Wells
APPENDIX IV
Callie Matise
Willie May Wunderle
Ruth E. Bracken
APPENDIX V
C. A. Lartigue
W. C. Kent
Olga Waite
Lessie Johnson
J. E. Brenizer
G. L. Hall
L. S. Crawford
D. Speyrer
W. F. Hunt
A. D. Smith
R. R. Finley
C. T. Long
H. C. Otey
J. E. Hoffpauir
J. A. Crain
731