The Texas Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 17, 1946

67 N.L.R.B. 452 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of THE TEXAS COMPANY and OIL WORKERS INTERNA-
TIONAL UNION, LOCAL 367, CIO
Case No. 16-R-1238.-Decided April 17,1946
Messrs. Hugh, McCloskey, J. A. Bermingham, A. V. Patterson, A. R.
Wilson, and Amzy B. Steed, of Houston Tex., for the Company.
Mr. Lindsay P. Walden, of Fort Worth, Tex., and Mr. J. J. Hickman,
of Pasadena, Tex., for the Union.
Mr. Donald H. Frank, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Oil Workers International Union,
Local 367, CIO, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affect-
ing commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees
of The Texas Company, Houston, Texas, herein called the Company,
the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate
hearing upon due notice before Earl Saunders, Trial Examiner. The
hearing was held at Houston, Texas, on October 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and
31, and November 1, 1945. The Company and the Union appeared
and participated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues.
At the hearing the Company' moved the dismissal of the petition.
For the reasons set forth in Sections III and IV, infra, the motion is
hereby denied. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. All parties were
afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board. The Company's
request for oral argument is hereby denied.
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, the producing de-
partment of which is engaged in the production of crude oil and gas.
67 N. L. R. B., No. 59.
452
THE TEXAS COMPANY 453
The South Texas Division of the producing department is the sole
operation of the Company involved in this proceeding. The Com-
pany ships annually from within the State of Texas to points outside
the State of Texas crude oil and oil products valued in excess of
$1,000,000. A substantial portion of the petroleum products shipped
outside the State of Texas is produced by the South Texas Division.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, and we so find.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Oil Workers International Union, Local 367, affiliated with the
Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admit-
ting to membership supervisory and non-supervisory 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 certain of the Company's
employees.
A statement of the Trial Examiner, made at the hearing, indicates
that the Union represents a substantial number of employees in the
unit hereinafter found appropriate., The Company's motion to dis-
miss the petition for lack of showing of interest has therefore been
denied.
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
In Matter of The Texas Companys2 decided on October 13, 1944,
the Board determined that the appropriate unit consisted of all the
Company's production and maintenance employees in the producing
department's South Texas Division, excluding, among others, drillers a
and head roustabouts. The Union here seeks to include these two cate-
gories of employees in the unit it presently represents as a result of
the election conducted in the 1944 case or, in the alternative, to establish
a separate bargaining unit of the drillers and head roustabouts. The
present record compels us to the same conclusion we reached in the
i The Trial Examiner reported that the Union submitted 265 authorization and ap-
plication -for-membership cards, 20 of which bore names of persons appearing on the
Company's pay roll of April 1, 1945, which contained the names of 55 employees in the
appropriate unit.
2 58 N . L. It. B. 963.
The present record makes it clear that the employees excluded from the unit under
the term "rotary drillers" in the 1944 Decision actually encompassed all the Company's
drillers , both "rotary" and "work-over ." They are therefore referred to herein under
the general term, "drillers."
454 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
1944 Decision, i. e., that these employees are supervisory employees
within our usual definition. The Union, moreover, has failed to estab-
lish that these employees, as supervisors, are included in units of pro-
duction and maintenance employees by custom in the industry. Upon
the entire record, we find insufficient grounds for including these
employees in the rank and file unit.
The Company moves to dismiss the petition on the grounds that
(1) these supervisors are "employers" within the meaning of the Act,
(2) a determination that they constitute an appropriate unit would
not effectuate the policies of the Act, and (3) they may not be repre-
sented by the same labor organization which represents the Company's
rank and file employees. The drillers and head roustabouts are the
lowest level in the Company's supervisory hierarchy and thus consti-
tute a relatively homogeneous group, having a community of interest
in their wages, hours, and working conditions. Although they are
in immediate charge of their crews, they do not participate in formu-
lating company policy. We are of the opinion that these supervisors
are employees within the meaning of the Act who constitute a sep-
arate appropriate Unit .4 Having concluded that these employees may
appropriately be represented in a separate bargaining unit, we would
exceed our authority were we to determine that the Union may not
represent them in that unit because it separately represents rank and
file employees of the Company'5 We have therefore denied the Com-
pany's motion to dismiss the petition.
We find that all the Company's drillers and head roustabouts in
the producing department's South Texas Division, but excluding all
other employees, 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
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-
' See Matter of The Midland Steel Products Company, Parish d Bingham Division,
65 N L R B. 997; Matter of Simmons Company, 65 N. L R. B. 984 ; Matter of L. A.
Young Spring & Ware Corporation, 65 N. L. R B. 298, Matter of The B. F. Goodrich
Company, 65 N L. R. B. 294
6 See Matter of Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, Vesta-Shannopin Coal Division, 66
N. L. R. B. 386.
THE TEXAS COMPANY 455
tions Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor
Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is
hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain represent-
atives for the purposes of collective bargaining with The Texas Com-
pany, Houston, Texas, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted
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, Sec-
tions 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees 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 any 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 Oil Workers International
Union, Local 367, CIO, for the purposes of collective bargaining.
MR. GERARD D. REILLY, dissenting :
Although I agree with the majority that the employees involved
here are supervisors who may not properly be included in the unit of
rank and file employees, I am constrained to disagree with the ma-
jority's decision for the reason stated in my dissenting opinions in
Matter of Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation, Vesta-Shannopin
Coal Divisions and Matter of Packard Motor Car Company., .
6 66 N. L R B. 386.
761N L.R.B 4.