Tide Water Associated Oil Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Feb 2, 1945

60 N.L.R.B. 356 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of TIDE WATER ASSOCIATED OIL COMPANY and Om
WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, C. I. O.
Case No. 16--R-1070.-Decided February P^, 1945
Mr. J. C. Young, of Tulsa, Okla., for the Company.
Mr. H. L. Campbell, of Fore Worth, Tex., Mr. W. F. Noell, of
Ponca City, Okla., and Messrs. C. M. Florence, William R. Sturge,
W. T. Blanton, and Roy Dorsey, all of Drumright. Okla., for the
Union.
Mr. Louis Monas, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF TIIE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Oil Workers International Union,
C. I. 0., herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting,
commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of
Tide Water Associated Oil Company, Houston, Texas, herein called
the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an
appropriate hearing upon due notice before Lewis Moore, Trial Ex-
aminer. Said hearing was held at Tulsa, Oklahoma, on December 7,
1944. 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 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
1. THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY
Tide Water Associated Oil Company is a Delaware corporation
engaged in the production, refining and transportation of crude oil
as wdll as the marketing of crude oil and its refined products. The
Company's Mid-Continent Division has its principal office at Houston,
60 N. L. R. B., No. 73.
356
TIDE WATER ASSOCIATED OIL COMPANY 357
Texas, and operates six producing districts in Oklahoma and Kansas,
a pipe line at Seminole, Oklahoma, and a refinery at Drumright,
Oklahoma, with which we are solely concerned. In addition, the
Mid-Continent Division also operates pipe lines and producing leases
in six other States. During the 6 months immediately preceding the
filing.of the petition herein, the Mid-Continent Division used in its
operations raw materials valued in excess of $100,000, less than 10
percent of which was received from points outside the State of Okla-
homa. During the same period the Mid-Continent Division produced
and sold goods valued in excess of $100,000, representing more than
50 percent of its total production, which were shipped to points
outside that State.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED
Oil Workers International Union, affiliated with the Congress of
Industrial Organizations, 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 certain of its employees until
the Union has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit.
A statement of a Board Field Examiner, introduced into evidence
at the hearing, indicates that the Union represents a substantial
number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate.'
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 urges as appropriate a single unit embracing all em-
ployees in the Mid-Continent Division's producing and refining de-
partments 2 in the States of Oklahoma and Kansas, excluding first
and second class machinists, machinist helpers, tool room men, black-
smiths, plant guards, office and technical employees, and supervisory
employees. The Company, however, maintains that two units are
I The Field Examiner reported that the Union submitted 9 authorization cards, and a
check-off list of 177 employees whose names appeared on the Company's pay roll, and
that there are 354 employees in the unit alleged to be appropriate At the hearing, a
representative of the Union testified that, of the 186 designations submitted, 61 or 62 were
for employees in the producing department, which employs 106 persons.
2 The pipe line department is considered auxiliary to the refining department.
358 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
appropriate, one limited to employees in the Mid-Continent Division's
producing department in the States of Oklahoma and Kansas, and the
other to employees in this division's refining department in the State
of Oklahoma.3
The Company has recognized the Union as the representative of its
members among the employees 'in the unit which it now seeks, in-
formally since September 1934, and by written agreement since July
28, 1941.4 Bargaining upon this basis has been conducted by the
Company and the Union since 1934, with the"Mid-Continent Divi-
sion's employees in the producing and refining departments in the
States of Oklahoma and Kansas treated, for the most part, as a single
unit. Moreover, since at least 1935, working rules were distributed
by the Company, applicable in large measure to all such employees as
one group.
The Company states there is no functional interrelation between the
producing and refining departments, each operating under the super-
vision of a separate manager, no interchange of employees between
them, and no true community of interest between the employees of
one and those of the other. Nevertheless, the Company's final posi-
tion of record was that the employees of these two departments should
be permitted, in separate elections, to determine for themselves whether
one or two units are appropriate, thus indicating that it concedes the
feasibility of a single unit. Its past bargaining relations with the
Union, while not controlling, also attest to this fact. We observe, fur-
thermore, that the unit sought is well-defined, covers all employees,
with certain exclusions, in two contiguous States, and that the Union
represents a substantial number of employees in each department.
From the foregoing facts, we conclude and find that all employees
of the Company in its Mid-Continent Division's producing and refin-
ing departments in the States of Oklahoma and Kansas, excluding
first and second class machinists, machinist helpers, tool room men,
blacksmiths, plant guards, office and technical employees, and all su-
pervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, dis-
cipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effec-
tively recommend such action, constitute a unit appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act s
3 The refining department of the Mid-Continent Division has no branch in Kansas
There were introduced into evidence two contracts between the Company and the Union„
one dated July 28 , 1941 , and the other March 1, 1944, -both reciting that the Union wag
"acting on behalf of such Employees of the Company , except Supervisory , Office and
Technical , who are members of the 011 Workers International Union, and who are located
in the Producing, Refining and Pipe Line Departments in the States of Oklahoma and
Kansas.
' See Matter of Shell Oil Company of California, 2 N. L. R B 835 ; and Matter of
Waggoner Refining Company, Inc., 6 N. L. R. B. 731.
TIDE WATER ASSOCIATED OIL COMPANY
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
359-
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 Elec-
tion herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
The Regional. Director, in conformity with customary practice,
may conduct the balloting, in whole or in part, by mail, if such pro-
cedure is deemed by him to be expedient.
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 Relations 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 representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Tide Water Asso-
ciated Oil Company, 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 mat-
ter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to
Article III, Sections 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 preced-
ing the date of this Direction, including employees who did not work
during the 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 elec-
tion, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Oil
Workers International Union, C. I. 0., for the purposes of collective
bargaining.