Cities Service Oil Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsDec 16, 1963

145 N.L.R.B. 467 (N.L.R.B. 1963)

CITIES SERVICE OIL CO. LAKE CHARLES, LA., OPERATIONS 467 4. Although served with a copy of the petition for Advisory Opinion, the Union filed no response as provided by the Board's Rules and Regulations. On the basis of the above, the Board is of the opinion that : 1. The Employer is engaged in the operation of a commercial radio broadcasting station at Nanticoke, Pennsylvania. 2. The Board's standard for exercising jurisdiction over enterprises engaged in the operation of radio stations is -a minimum gross volume of business of $100,000 per annum.' 3. The petition herein does not allege the Employer's gross volume of business but for purposes of this Advisory Opinion, we shall assume that it remained less than $100,000 as it was alleged to have been during fiscal years 1959 and 1960. Absent evidence contrary to this assumption, the Employer's operations do not meet the mini- mum gross volume of business test of the Board's jurisdictional stand- ard for radio stations. Accordingly, the parties are advised under Section 102.103 of the Board's Rules and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, that the Board would not assert jurisdiction over the Employer because the allega- tions submitted herein do not establish that its operations meet the Board's standard for asserting jurisdiction over radio stations. 2 Raritan Valley Broadca8tiny Company, Inc., 122 NLRB 90. Cities Service Oil Company Lake Charles, La., Operations, Peti- tioner and Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union , AFL-CIO, and its Local 4-500 and Lake Charles Metal Trades Council , AFL-CIO and United Plant Guard Workers of America , Ind., and its Local 700 and International Associa- tion of Machinists , Lodge 1317, AFL-CIO. Cases Nos. 15-RAI- 17., 15-RC- 721, and 15-RC-.2758. December 16, 1963 DECISION, ORDER, AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS Upon separate petitions duly filed, hearings were held before Hear- ing Officer John T. Lacey of the National Labor Relations Board. The cases are hereby consolidated for purposes of decision.' The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearings are free from preju- dical error and are hereby affirmed. I A hearing was held in April and May 1963, in Cases Nos. 15-RM-172 and 15-RC-2721, involving the question of appropriate units at the Employer 's three -plant Lake Charles industrial complex . A later hearing was held on July 31, 1963, in Case No . 15-RC-2758, involving the question of an appropriate unit at a fourth plant in the complex which commenced operations after the completion of the earlier hearing The parties stipulated to the incorporation of the entire record of the first hearing into the record of the second hearing . We grant the Employer ' s motion to consolidate the cases for purposes of deci- sion , in view of their related facts and issues 145 NLRB No. 47. 468 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with these cases to a three-member panel [Members Fanning, Brown, and Jenkins]. Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em- ployees of the Employer. 3. Questions affecting commerce exist concerning the representation of certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of Sections 9(c) (1) and2(6) and (7) of the Act.' 4. The major unit question herein raised concerns the appropriate- ness of a multiplant unit of production and maintenance employees at the Lake Charles, Louisiana, industrial complex of The Cities Service Company, of which the Employer, Cities Service Oil Com- pany, is 'a wholly owned subsidiary. In Case No. 15-RM-172, the Employer contends that despite 'a long bargaining history at Lake Charles on single-plant bases at the three plants which then comprised the complex, a recent reorganization of the Cities Service managerial, administrative, and operational structure in effect produced a single new operation at Lake Charles, for which only a multiplant bargain- ing unit is appropriate. Lake Charles Metal Trades Council, AFL- CIO, herein called LCMTC; Oil, Chemical 'and Atomic Workers In- ternational Union, AFL-CIO, and its Local 4-500, herein called OCAW; and United Plant Guard Workers of America, Ind., and its Local 700, herein called UPGWA, contend that the Cities Service re- organization did not produce such a substantial change in the char- acter of the Lake Charles operations as to render only a multiplant unit appropriate. A second unit question concerns the appropriateness of 'a single- plant unit of production and maintenance employees at a new Lake Charles plant, sought by the OCAW in Case No. 15-RC-2758, but opposed by the LCMTC on the ground that those employees properly constitute an accretion to its existing production and maintenance unit at one of the three older plants at Lake Charles, and further opposed by the Employer, in view of its multiplant position. A third unit question concerns (a) the validity of UPGWA's motion to amend a prior single-plant Board certification at one of the three 9 Lake Charles Metal Trades Council contends that the Employer 's petition herein raises no question concerning representation , as no union seeks an election in the multiplant unit urged by the Employer . While this contention may have had merit at the time it was made, the Employer's renewal of its multiplant unit contention at the later hearing in Case No. 15-RC-2758, noted in footnote 1, above, in our opinion raised a valid question concerning representation with regard to all of the operations here involved, in view of their interrelated character . Compare Southern Greyhound Lines , Division of the Grey- hound Corporation, 141 NLRB 753. CITIES SERVICE OIL CO. LAKE CHARLES, LA., OPERATIONS 469 older Lake Charles plants so as to include as accretions thereto all guard classifications at Lake Charles; and (b) the scope and com- position of a multiplant guard unit sought in its petition in Case No. 15-RC-2721, filed as an alternative to its motion. The Lake Charles Operations There are four contiguous plants at Lake Charles, including the Refinery, Cit-Con, and PCI, which have been in existence for several years, and the Butyl Plant, a new plant which commenced operations in July 1963. The Refinery refines petroleum, and Cit-Con, PCI, and the Butyl Plant produce lubricating oil, petro-chemicals, and butyl rubber, respectively. For many years prior to the Employer's incorporation in 1962, three Cities Service subsidiaries, known as Cities Service Refining Corporation, Cit-Con Oil Corporation, and Petroleum Chemicals, Inc., owned and operated the Refinery, Cit- Con, and PCI, respectively .3 In 1962, there occurred a reorganization in the Cities Service managerial, administrative, and operational structure, in the course of which the Employer came into existence and, as of January 1, 1963, undertook to operate the three plants then in existence at the Lake Charles complex, pursuant to separate but similar 1-year contracts. As a result of the reorganization, the Em- ployer merged the identity of Cities Service Refining Company with its own, placed the employees of the Refinery, Cit-Con, and PCI on its own payroll, and consolidated within its organization such matters as personnel functions, industrial relations, technical services , treas- ury, budgeting, accounting, traffic, and maintenance on a centralized basis. On the other hand, Cit-Con and PCI, unlike Cities Service Refining Company, maintained their separate identity notwithstanding re- organization, retaining their officers, conducting corporate meetings, and asserting general administrative control over corporate functions, profits, production, inventories, purchases, budgets, and capital out- lays. Although, as noted above, the Employer undertook to operate these companies, the 1-year operating agreements rendered the Em- ployer's operation of these plants subject to policies established by operating committees organized by the Cit-Con and PCI directors pursuant to their bylaws and specifically reserved control of produc- tion in those corporate subsidiaries. The reorganization left the em- ployees' work situs and conditions of employment substantially un- changed. In July 1963, the Butyl Plant, owned by Columbian Carbon Company, a wholly owned Cities Service subsidiary, and staffed with 3 , Sixty-five percent of the stock of Cit^Con is owned by the Cities Service Company ; the remainder is owned by Continental Oil Company . Petroleum Chemicals, Inc, is a wholly owned subsidiary , as was Cities Service Refining Corporation until its termination in 1962, as a result of The Cities Service reorganization hereinafter described. 470 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD employees from the Refinery, Cit-Con, and PCI, commenced produc- tion pursuant to an operating agreement with the Employer sub- stantially similar to the other aforementioned operating agreements; unlike them, however, it provided that control over operating pro- cedures at the Butyl Plant be vested in Columbian Carbon Company, the Butyl Plant owner, and that technical direction of the operating process be vested in the Butyl Plant superintendent who, it was stipu- lated, was not an employee of the Employer. Bargaining History at the Lake Charles Operations TTze Re finery : LCMTC has continuously represented a unit of production and maintenance employees since its certifications in 1951 and 1957; its most recent contract expires on May 4, 1964. UPGWA has represented the plant protection employees since its certification in 1958; its latest contract carried a termination date of July 1, 1963. Cit-Con : OCAWWW was certified by the Board in 1950 for a unit of production and maintenance employees, which it has continuously rep- resented since that time; its latest contract had an expiration date of September 1, 1963. The plant protection employees are unrepre- sented. PCI: LCMTC has represented a unit of operating and main- tenance employees since its certification in 1959; its latest contract expired on May 1, 1963. UPGWA has represented a unit of plant protection employees since its certification in 1958; its current contract expires on March 1, 1964. In addition to the above unions, Interna- tional Association of Machinists currently represents separate plant- wide units of machinists at all three plants, and Office Employees International Union recently executed a single contract covering the Lake Charles office employees. None of the labor organizations here- in directly involved seek to represent the employees in the IAM and Office Employees units. There is no bargaining history at the Butyl Plant. Case No. 15-RM-172 In Case No. 15-RM-172 the Employer contends that the 1962 re- organization produced, in effect, a new highly integrated operation, for which only a single multiplant unit is appropriate.' We do not agree. While it is true that the reorganization effected a centraliza- tion of management, administration, and plant operations, it appears to have produced no substantial change in the identity or operation of the individual plants or the diversity of their products, or in the job classifications or conditions of employment of the employees at these 4 The Employer states that its unit position is not "inflexible ." It appears to contend that a multiplant unit of production and maintenance employees is the only appropriate unit or, at the least , the most appropriate unit But whatever the composition of the unit, it maintains that only a unit which is multiplant in scope is appropriate CITIES SERVICE OIL CO. LAKE CHARLES, LA., OPERATIONS 471 plants, who continue to work in their same separate work areas, with- out interchange and under separate immediate supervision. Further- more, as noted above, the ownership and ultimate control of plant operations remains in the individual corporate subsidiaries, notwith- standing the reorganization. In such circumstances, while, as a re- sult of the reorganization, a multiplant unit as proposed by the Em- ployer might be appropriate, it has not been shown that such is the only appropriate type of unit herein. For, upon the entire record, we cannot find that the separate plant units involved which are in- herently appropriate and supported by Board certifications and many years of bargaining have been so merged or integrated into a more comprehensive unit as to have lost their separate identity for bargain- ing purposes.' In view thereof, apart from other considerations,' and in the absence of a request by a labor organization for a multi- plant unit which might provide a basis for the establishment of a unit coextensive with the Lake Charles complex,' we shall dismiss the Employer's petition in Case No. 15-RM-172. Case No. 15-RC-2758 OCAW seeks an election in a plantwide unit at the new Butyl Plant. LCMTC contends that the Butyl Plant employees constitute an accretion to its current production and maintenance unit at the Refinery. UPGWA merely seeks a declaration that employees in cer- tain job classifications are guards, within the meaning of the Act. The Employer urges the inappropriateness of the unit on the ground that only a multiplant unit of Lake Charles employees is appropriate. The Butyl Plant alone produces butyl rubber. It is contiguous to the other plants and under separate immediate supervision. The work force includes 56 operators, who are permanently assigned and do not interchange with employees at any of the other plants. We find, contrary to the LCMTC, that the employees of the new Butyl Plant are not an accretion to its unit and that they constitute a clearly identifiable group with similar interests who may properly constitute a separate appropriate unit.8 Case No. 15-RC-2721 In the event the Board favors the multiplant unit proposed by the Employer, UPGAVA, by motion in Case No. 15-RC-172, seeks a clari- fication of its 1958 certification at the Refinery which would include 5 Cf. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc, 132 NLRB 1502: Dixie Belle Mills , Ino, 139 NLRB 829 U LCMTC claims as a bar a current contract which, as noted above, covers a certified production and maintenance unit at the Refinery and is effective to May 4, 1964 Y See Western Electric Company, Incorporated, 108 NLRB 396, 398 1 Cities Service Refining Corporation, 121 NLRB 1091, at 1092-1093. 472 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD all guards at the Lake Charles operation in the certified unit. Alter- natively, UPGWA filed its petition in Case No. 15-RC-2721, also seeking a unit of all guards at the Lake Charles operation. We deny the motion as without merit, as the unit claimed is substantially dif- ferent from the certified unit, and the motion, if granted, would preclude the unrepresented Cit-Con and Butyl Plant guards from par- ticipation in a self-determination election to determine their desires as to representation by UPGWA,,a matter which can only be deter- mined in a representation proceeding. We further find without merit UPGWA's multi^plant unit request in Case No. 15-RC-2721. This petition was filed prior to the commencement of operations at the new Butyl Plant, and does not embrace the guards at the new Butyl Plant. However, in view of the inherent appropriateness of single-plant units at the Lake Charles complex, we shall direct,an election in a unit of the unrepresented guards at Cit-Con, who are sought by UPGWA, leaving undisturbed UPGWA's existing single-plant guard units at the Refinery and PCL9 A question remains as to the composition of the guard unit at Cit- Con. UPGWA would include firemen and safety inspectors. There are no firemen. Safety inspectors is -a category which, in an earlier decision involving PCI, the Board held not to be guards within the meaning of the Act, on the ground that their guard duties were at best sporadic, and their authority to enforce safety regulations did not make them guards within the meaning of the Act.10 As the duties of the instant safety inspectors appear to be substantially the same as in the earlier case, we exclude them from the unit as nonguards. Accordingly, we find that the following employee groups at the Lake Charles, Louisiana, complex of the Cities Service Company constitute units appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 ('b) of the Act : 11 (a) All employees of the Butyl Plant of Columbian Carbon Company, including operators and safety inspectors, but exclud- ing employees of other plants,12 office clerical employees, machin- 6 See cases cited in footnote 5, supra 10 Petroleum Chemicals, Inc., 121 NLRB 630, at 632-633. 71 IIPGWA's showing of interest in unit ( b) is not clear . Accordingly , we instruct the Regional Director not to proceed with the election in this unit until he shall have first determined that UPGWA has made an adequate showing of interest among the employees in this unit who are eligible to vote in the election . Furthermore , as unit (b) is sub- stantially different from that petitioned for, we hereby permit UPGWA , should it so desire, to withdraw its petition without prejudice upon written notice to the Regional Director within 10 days from the date of the Direction of Election Ia Employees of other plants include a fluctuating group of maintenance employees who are permanently assigned to the other Lake Charles plants, where they are included in the single -plant production and maintenance units currently represented by the OCAW and the LCMTC. Although they have hitherto been drawn from the Refinery to perform maintenance work at the Butyl Plant, they are obtainable from any of the Lake Charles plants which may have a surplus of them at the time they are needed . The Employer has no intention of hiring a permanent maintenance force for the Butyl Plant. CURTIS MATHES MANUFACTURING COMPANY 473 ists, machinist helpers, machinist apprentices, garage mechanics and their helpers, watchmen, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act. (b) All guards at the Cit-Con plant of Cit-Con Oil Corpora- tion, excluding safety inspectors, all other employees, and super- visors as defined in the Act. [The Board dismissed the petition in Case No. 15-RM-172.] [Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.] Curtis Mathes Manufacturing Company and United Furniture Workers of America, AFL-CIO, Local Union 376. Cases Nos. 16-CA-1748 and 16-CA-1765. December 17, 1963 DECISION AND ORDER On April 30, 1963, Trial Examiner Frederick U. Reel issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Inter- mediate Report. Thereafter, the Respondent and the General Counsel filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report and supporting briefs. The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Intermediate Report and the entire record in the case, including the exceptions and briefs, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner, with the following modification : Respondent manufactures television, radio, and hi-fi combinations at its plant in Athens, Texas. One part of its plant, designated "the mill," is devoted to the production of wood cabinets. The mill is a room approximately 240 feet wide and 400 feet long divided into functional areas not all separated by walls. Thus, the mill consists of the finish mill, the glue room, the rough mill, the knife grinding department, the framing department, the cabinet room, and the sand- ing area. The production process starts with the cutting of lumber in the rough mill and continues through the finishing, sanding, gluing, and other processes. 'Dust created by the operation of the saws, sanders, planes, and other machinery utilized in the mill is collected by a suction system through ducts attached to heads over each ma- chine. The dust is gathered into the "harvestore," a container located 145 NLRB No. 52.