The Texas Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 3, 1939

11 N.L.R.B. 925 (N.L.R.B. 1939)

In the Matter of THE TEXAS COMPANY and OIL WORKERS INTER-
NATIONAL UNION LOCAL #280
Case No. R-1157-Decided March 3, 1939
Crude Oil Production Industry-Investigation of Representatives : question
concerning representation of employees : refusal of employer to bargain unless
appropriate unit and duly designated representatives determined by Board-
Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : production employees in geographic
district, including roustabouts , pumpers, clean-out drillers and helpers, truck
drivers, laborers , and excluding head roustabouts , the district clerk, the junior
engineer , and supervisory , clerical , and warehouse employees ; wide geographical
coverage not controlling factor, district otherwise unified ; desires of employees-
Representatives : proof of choice : signatures attested by witnesses-Certifica-
tion or Representatives : upon proof of majority representation.
Mr. Elmer P. Davis, and Mr. Alba B. Martin, for the Board.
Mr. James H. Pipkin, of Houston, Tex., and Mr. John R. Ramsey,
of Tulsa, Okla., for the Company. -
Mr. Maurice Daly, and Mr. R. H. Stickel, of Tulsa, Okla., and
Mr. T. H. Brown, of Drumright, Okla., for the Union.
Mr. Sidney Sugerman, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On April 27, 1938, Oil Workers International Union Local 280,
CIO, herein called the Union, filed with the Regional Director for
the Sixteenth Region (Fort Worth, Texas) a petition alleging that a
question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation
of employees of The Texas Company, Cushing, Oklahoma, herein
called the Company, and requesting an investigation and certification
of representatives pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On October 26,
1938, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board,
acting pursuant to Section 9 (c) of the Act and Article III, Section
3, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations- Series
1, as amended, ordered an investigation and authorized the Regional
Director to conduct it and to provide for an appropriate hearing upon
due notice.
11 N. L . R. B., No. 74.
925
926 DECISIONS OF NATTONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
On December 9, 1938, the Regional Director issued a notice of
hearing, copies of which were duly served upon the Company and
upon the Union. Pursuant to the notice, a hearing was held on
December 15 and 16, 1938, at Cushing, Oklahoma, and, by stipula-
tion of all the parties, at Tulsa, Oklahoma, on December 17, 1938,
before Joseph F. Kiernan, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the
Board. The Board and the Company were represented by counsel,
and the Union by its officers and agents; all participated in the hear-
ing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine
witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues was af-
forded all parties. During the course of the hearing the Trial Ex-
aminer made several rulings on motions and on objections to the
admission of evidence. On January 10, 1939, the Company filed a
brief, which the Board has considered. The Board has reviewed
the rulings of the Trial Examiner and finds that no prejudicial errors
were committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed.
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 office in New York City, and an office in Tulsa, Oklahoma. It
has been engaged since 1927 in the production, refining, and distribu-
tion of oil and oil products in the State of Oklahoma and elsewhere.
The Company produces within the State of Oklahoma not less than
8,000 barrels of crude oil per day. In what it defines as the Cushing
District of Oklahoma, the Company produces approximately 1,500
barrels of crude oil per day on a total of 69 leases. Of this produc-
tion approximately 300 barrels are transported daily through a pipe
line, not owned or operated by the Company, to its own refinery
in Oklahoma known as West Tulsa Works.' While in transit
through the pipe line, or at the refinery, the oil mixes with other
crude oil either produced by the Company or purchased by it from
other Oklahoma producers. None of the oil entering the refinery
is received from outside the State. All crude oil received at the
refinery is there processed. The capacity of the refinery is 15,000
barrels per day. Not less than 60 per cent of the finished products
thereof are transported into States other than Oklahoma. At least
34 per cent of the purchases for the West Tulsa Works, including
chemicals and machinery, are made outside the State.
1 See Matter of The Texas Company, West Tulsa Works and Oil Workers' International
Union, Local No. 217, 4 N L. R. B. 182.
THE TEXAS COMPANY ET AL. 927
The remaining 1,200 barrels of crude oil produced daily in the
Cushing District by the Company are sold from its storage tanks at
the site of the leases, at which point title evidently passes, to numer-
ous other companies. The oil thus sold is run off into private pipe
lines of the several purchasers or into common-carrier lines, even-
tually to be commingled with other crude oil in main or trunk lines,
way-station storage tanks, or refineries. Some quantity commingles
in certain lines, tanks, or refineries with crude oil brought in from
States other than Oklahoma; some of the commingled crude oil in
certain other lines is destined for points outside the State, by way
of pipe systems, tank cars, or trucks. .
An average of 125 barrels of the Company's production in the Dis-
trict leaves Oklahoma daily in its crude, commingled state. Ap-
proximately 64 per cent of the products of the local refineries process-
ing the remainder in such state are transported out of Oklahoma.
Some of such products are sold f. o. b. local refinery, and some at
their ultimate destination outside the State.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Oil Workers International Union Local 280 is a labor organization
affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organization, admitting
to its membership all production and maintenance employees of the
Company, excluding supervisory, clerical, and warehouse employees.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
In the middle of March 1938, the Union communicated with the
Company for an appointment to confer for the purpose of collective
bargaining. On March 26 and April 19, 1938, a committee of the
Union, claiming to represent a majority of the Company's employees
in the Cushing District, met with representatives of the Company
for the purpose of collective bargaining. The Company stated that
it did not know, but would welcome the Board's determining, what
would comprise an appropriate unit for that purpose, and who should
represent the employees therein.
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
928 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
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
In its petition the Union alleges that "all production employees,
exclusive of supervisory, clerical and warehouse employees" of the
Company's production department, in its Cushing District, constitute
an appropriate bargaining unit. In the course of the hearing the
Union contended for a defined unit which would include only such
field workers as roustabouts, pumpers, C. O. (clean-out) drillers and
helpers, truck drivers, laborers, and Ex. (extra) laborers, excluding
all such other employees in the District as the superintendent, fore-
men, head roustabouts, and other "members of management."
The Company claims to entertain no opinion and makes no sugges-
tion or contention as to the appropriate unit, contenting itself merely
to question the efficacy of the unit contended for by the Union, and
.prays enlightenment in a novel problem hitherto undecided in the oil
fields.
The Company's domestic crude oil production department has five
territorial divisions, each under a division manager. The Oklahoma-
Kansas and Kentucky Division, with headquarters in Tulsa, Okla-
homa, comprises the States of Oklahoma, Kansas, Kentucky, Illinois,
and Indiana. That Division has 10 districts, of which 6 are within
the State of Oklahoma, each under a superintendent, encompassing
certain producing fields or pools within its confines. The Cushing
District is in that Division, and wholly within the State of Oklahoma.
The Cushing District is an arbitrary assemblage of pools or pro-
ducing wells in an area without fixed geographical outline, extending
approximately 130 miles east and west and 50 miles north and south.
Neither the districts nor the pools within them are necessarily con-
tiguous. Determinative factors in the creation of districts are road
conditions, distance between pools, extent of operations, and general
facilities of production and transportation. Districts may be en-
larged or curtailed in scope, or stripper wells therein may be aban-
doned and new wells brought in and developed. In other words, the
outlines may fluctuate from time to time, as may the activity within
them, either of which eventualities may necessitate the shifting and
transfer of workers from one point to another.
The Company employs in its production department in the six
districts of Oklahoma a personnel of approximately 560, of whom
about 480 are on the field pay roll. Of the latter number approxi-
mately 91 attend production on the 69 operating leases within the.
Cushing District.
THE TEXAS COMPANY ET AL . 929
The unit described by the Union is homogeneous with relation to
the interests of its constituents. It is characterized by a "community
of thought" in its problems with management, despite the other dis-
advantages of a wide-flung unit of such coverage. On the other hand,
to enlarge further the geographical scope of the unit beyond the
present limits of the Cushing District would, to some extent, deprive
the workers of that cohesion necessary to effective exercise of their
right to collective bargaining. Members of the Oil Workers Inter-
national Union outside the Cushing District have not requested the
petitioning Local 280 to act for them. There is no history of organi-
zational activity to point the way.
The Company queries whether a more narrowly bounded area might
not more appropriately suit the purpose sought to be achieved : e. g.,
the concentration of employees around Drumright, the seat of Local
280, or at some particular production area . The Union answers that
it would then have to deal with a foreman , who is subordinate to
the district superintendent, and is without power to adjust grievances.
As for the classifications of workers sought by the Union to be
included in the appropriate unit, there appear no appreciable differ-
entiations of interest, function, or vocation among such employees
as would lessen the advantage of their organization . Indeed it seems
a natural grouping. Testimony given by the Company designed to
prove the contrary is not convincing.
The sole remaining phase of the inquiry into the unit appropriate
for the purpose of collective bargaining is whether those classifica-
tions of workers admittedly in the production department, but sought
by the Union to be excluded, ought properly to be included in their
organization . The desires of the employees must be given great
weight. Such acknowledged supervisory employees of the Company
as the superintendent and foremen in the District should be excluded.
The hearing developed a serious conflict of opinion as to employees
designated as head roustabouts. The head roustabout supervises the
work of from 3 to 15 roustabouts, working along with them in their
defined duties, and directing their routine . While he has no power,
of his own initiative, to hire or discharge, or to order major, expen-
sive repairs or replacements of machinery, he makes recommendations
as to such matters and executes consequent orders of the superin-
tendent or foremen. He is paid at a slightly higher wage rate and
for a longer workweek than his crew, the pumpers, truck drivers, or
laborers. Where the sole labor organization involved so desires, we
have followed the practice of excluding employees of a minor super-
visory status from the appropriate unit. As the Union here desires
the exclusion of head roustabouts as such employees, we shall exclude
them accordingly.
930 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
G. A. Scott, the district clerk, performs purely clerical duties for
the Company's Cushing District. He prepares and keeps time sheets
and pay rolls, and alone, of all those employees considered for the
appropriate unit, is paid on a monthly basis. His work is supervisory
only to the extent indicated, but is so differentiated in character from
that performed by the other employees as to warrant his exclusion
from the unit.
R. E. Couch, listed on one pay roll exhibit as a laborer, but on the
latest as a junior engineer, and otherwise characterized as a "student
engineer" doing a roustabout's work for field experience, is plainly
in a separate category. He should be excluded from the appropriate
unit.
In the present state of organization in this field, and under all
the circumstances of this case, we find that the production employees
of the Company in its Cushing District, including roustabouts,
pumpers, clean-out drillers and their helpers, truck drivers, laborers,
and extra laborers, but excluding head roustabouts, the district clerk,
the junior engineer, and all supervisory, clerical, and warehouse
employees, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining and that said unit will insure to employees of the
Company the full benefit of their right to self-organization and to
collective bargaining and otherwise effectuate the policies of the Act.
VI. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
The Union desires to be certified as exclusive bargaining repre-
sentative for employees of the Company in the defined appropriate
unit. It claims that the members of other locals of the Oil Workers
International Union who are production employees of the Com-
pany within the unit desire Local 280 to act for them in the premises.
No other such local, and no other labor organization, has sought to
bargain with the Company on behalf of such employees. Local 280
undertakes to bargain for them in that capacity through a committee
designated by employees of the Company within the unit.
The Company's November 30, 1938, pay roll in evidence, as
amended, which was the last immediately preceding the date of the
hearing, lists the names of 78 employees in the appropriate unit,
including an "extra" laborer whose work is not shown by the record
to be either irregular or temporary, although he is not listed on
previous pay rolls in evidence 2 Forty-three application cards for
membership in the Union, authorizing it to act for the applicants as
a collective bargaining agency, were received in evidence. These bore
2 The pay roll lists 91 employees , of whom 5 are foremen, 6 are head roustabouts, 1 is
a junior engineer , and 1 is a district clerk.
THE TEXAS COMPANY ET AL. 931
dates or were sufficiently proven to have been signed within several
days prior to the hearing. The signatures were duly verified and
identified by the testimony of witnesses in whose presence they were
affixed, four of whom besides identified their own respective signa-
tures thereon.
One of the 43 cards will be excluded, however, since it was signed
by an ineligible not included in the appropriate unit. That is the
card of James A. Lowe, who is described in the record as a head
roustabout, a classification of employee excluded from the appro-
priate unit. The remaining 42 cards evidence a clear and valid
choice by a majority of the employees of the Company in the
appropriate unit.
We find that the Union has been designated and selected by a
majority of the employees in the appropriate unit as their repre-
sentative for the purposes of collective bargaining. It is, therefore,
the exclusive representative of all the employees in such unit for the
purposes of collective bargaining, and we will so certify.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire
record in the case, the Board makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
1. A question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the repre-
sentation of employees of The Texas Company, Cushing, Oklahoma,
within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The production employees of the Company in its Cushing Dis-
trict, including roustabouts, pumpers, clean-out drillers and their
helpers, truck drivers, laborers, and extra laborers, but excluding
head roustabouts, the district clerk, the junior engineer, and all
supervisory, clerical, and warehouse employees, constitute a unit
apppropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act.
3. Oil Workers International Union Local 280 is the exclusive rep-
resentative of all the employees in such unit for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act.
CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Re-
lations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 1, as amended,
932 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
IT IS ]HEREBY CERTIFIED that Oil Workers International Union
Local 280 has been designated and selected by a majority of the
production employees of The Texas Company, Cushing, Oklahoma,
including roustabouts, pumpers, clean-out drillers and their helpers,
truck drivers, laborers, and extra laborers in the Cushing District,
but excluding head roustabouts, the district clerk, the junior en-
gineer, and all supervisory, clerical, and warehouse employees, as
their representative for the purposes of collective bargaining and
that, pursuant to the provisions of Section 9 (a) of the Act, Oil
Workers International Union Local 280 is the exclusive representa-
tive of all such employees for the purposes of collective bargaining in
respect to rates of pay, wages , hours of employment, and other con-
ditions of employment.