Great Lakes Pipe Line Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsDec 10, 1945

64 N.L.R.B. 1296 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter of GREAT LAKES PIPE LINE COMPANY and OIL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL 348, CIO Case No. 17-B-1161.-Decided December 10, 1945 Messrs. Charles M. Blaekmar and E. H. Skinner, both of Kansas City, Mo., for the Company. Messrs. B. T. Sargent and Ray Collier, both of Kansas City, Kans., for the C. I. O. Messrs. C. I. McNutt and Leo Quinn, both of Des Moines, Iowa, for the A. F. of L. Mr. Angelo J. Fiumara, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon a petition duly filed by Oil Workers Internatiofal Union, Local 348, CIO, herein called the CIO, alleging that a question affect- ing commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Great Lakes Pipe Line Company, Kansas City, Missouri, herein called the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before Margaret L. Fassig, 'Trial Examiner. The hearing was held at Kansas City, Missouri, on July 23, 1945. The Company, the CIO, and Local 90, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, A. F. of L., herein called the A. F. of L., appeared and par- ticipated. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bear- ing 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 Great Lakes Pipe Line Company, a Delaware corporation with its principal office located in Kansas City, Missouri, is a common carrier 64 N. L . R. B., No. 215. 1296 GREAT LAKES PIPE LINE COMPANY 1297 engaged in the transportation of petroleum products. Its operations are conducted in seven States under tariffs filed with the Interstate Commerce Commission, and in accordance with the Acts of Congress applicable to interstate pipe lines. The Company's system is com- prised of over 2,000 miles of pipe lines, 4,000 miles of wire, and more than 1,000 miles of pole lines. During the year 1944, the Company transported in interstate commerce, through its pipe lines, petroleum products at the rate of 60,000 barrels per day; the estimated daily value of such production exceeded $100,000. The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. 11. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED Oil Workers International Union, Local 348, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, is a labor organization admit- ting to membership employees of the Company. Local 90, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor organization admitting to membership employees of the Company. 111. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION By letter of June 11, 1945, the CIO advised the Company that it represented a majority of certain of the Company's employees in an alleged appropriate bargaining unit and requested a collective bar- (aining conference. The Company refused such request until the CIO is certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. A statement of a Board agent, introduced into evidence at the hear- ing, indicates that the CIO represents a substantial number of em- ployees 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. 'The Field Examiner reported that the CIO submitted 32 application-for-membership eat ds , that the names of all persons appearing on these cards w ere listed on the Coin- pany's pay loll of June 16, 1945, which contained the names of 83 employees in the unit alleged to be appropriate by the CIO, and that the cards were all dated dui mg May and June 1945 The Field Examiner further reported that the A F of L submitted a notarized list of members containing 14 names of employees in the unit alleged by it to he appropriate There are appioxuuatel, 30 employees in the unit sought by the A. F of L The Trial Examiner reported at the hearing, that the CIO submitted 2 additional application-fon-membership cards, both dated July 14, 1945 , that the A. F of L furnished 14 application-for-menibeiship cards, 12 of winch were dated between March and June 1945, and 2 weme undated, and that the names on the cards submitted by the A F of L weme the same as those appearing on its notarized list previously fuimshed to the Field Examiner 670417-46-vol 64-83 1298 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The CIO seeks a unit composed of all operating and maintenance employees of the Company engaged in its superintendent district No. 3, excluding telephone linemen, the district clerk, the chief terminal clerk, and all supervisory employees. The Teamsters, on the other hand, contends that the appropriate unit is one consisting of all rack foremen, engineers, laboratory men or testers, rack men, terminal gaugers, tankcar repairmen, rack laborers, and terminal laborers at the Company's Des Moines, Iowa, terminal. The Company, although expressing a preference for a system-wide unit, did not take any affirmative position with regard thereto. There are five superintendent districts in the Company's entire pipe-line system, each being primarily concerned with the mainte- nance and operation of the properties within its geographic confines. The Company's operations in its superintendent district No. 3 com- prise seven stations 2 and two terminals, one at Des Moines, Iowa, and the other at Omaha, Nebraska. The general function of the station operators involves the pumping of gasoline and refined petroleum products, while the terminal employees blend products and prepare them for shipment. The record discloses that the station and ter- minal employees, although under separate immediate supervision, are ultimately under the jurisdiction of the district superintendent; that there have been some employee transfers between the terminals and the stations; and that there are employees throughout the ter- minals and stations of the district who have similar industrial classi- fications and like duties and interests. We have recently had occasion to review generally the functional operations and the administrative organization of the Company.3 In the face of a contention by the Company and an intervening union' that only, a system-wide unit composed of all employees of the Com- pany was appropriate, we found, in accordance with the claims of the CIO, that the employees of superintendent district No. 2 formed an appropriate unit. We there pointed out that the "employees engaged in the superintendent districts constitute well-defined functional and homogeneous groups," and that "while we are of the opinion that, ultimately, a system-wide unit will be proper, no sufficient reason has been advanced for denying a distinct and identifiable group of em- ployees the right to bargain collectively at this time." Except for the fact that no issue was raised in that proceeding with respect to establishing a terminal as a separate unit, the reasoning of the Board 2 Five of these stations are operating and two are closed ; all are situated in Iowa, except one which is located at Ridgeway , Missouri. 3 See Matter of Great Lakes Pipe Line Company, 56 N. L R. B. 227. 4 The intervening union failed to introduce documentary evidence that It represented any of the Company 's employees. GREAT LAKES PIPE LINE COMPANY 1299 in finding appropriate a unit limited to the confines of superintendent district No. 2 would appear to be equally applicable in the instant case involving similar employees of the comparable superintendent district No. 3. As regards the Teamsters' contention, we are not satisfied that the Des Moines, Iowa, terminal employees constitute an appropriate bar- gaining group. Thus, the group sought does not constitute a craft unit on a divisional basis nor is it a departmental unit with craft characteristics. Nor does it include all employees identically classi- fied or performing similar work in the district since it would exclude approximately seven laborers, four terminal gaugers, three rack men, and one tester who are employed in other parts of the district and who apparently perform work comparable to similarly classified employees petitioned for at the terminal. Finally, the CIO has made a sub- stantial showing of interest among employees in the broader unit which includes the employees in whom the Teamsters is interested. In this connection, we have heretofore held that we customarily will not predicate a unit finding on the extent of one union's organizations where organization of the employees by a rival union has been effected in a broader appropriate bargaining unit.° Consequently, in view of all these circumstances, we are persuaded that the separate unit re- quested by the Teamsters is inappropriate 6 and that the more inclu- sive unit desired by the CIO is appropriate. There remailis for consideration the specific composition of the unit. Rack foremen: The 010 and the Teamsters agree to the inclusion of the rack foremen while the Company takes no position with regard thereto. The rack foremen are stationed at•the terminals 'and are in charge of the loading operations. The record disclosed that they are authorized summarily to discharge any employee for any one of the following reasons : stealing, sleeping on the job, being drunk or drink- ing on the job, or smoking on the Company's premises. Moreover, they are excluded from the bargaining unit established by the Board for superintendent District No. 2 and from the subsequent agreement between the Company and the CIO covering employees in that dis- trict. Under all the circumstances, we find that rack foremen are "See Matter of Union Switch and Signal Company , 63 N. L R B . 974; and Matter of lrrstinq/ouse Air Brake Company, 64 N L R B 547 "We are unable to agree with the Teamsters ' contention that a Board election held on, April 24. 1945, among the Des Moines, Iowa, terminal employees, pursuant to a consent election agreement between the Teamsters and the Company compels a finding that a unit of terminal employees is appioprmte Inasmuch as the Teamsters lost the election and no collective bargaining resulted, the Board, under well-established principles is not pre- cluded from finding a mole comprehensive unit appropriate Nor do we deem controlling the fact that another local union affiliated with the same international union as the Team^tcrs is the bargaining representative for certain employees in the Company's St. Paul ALnne'ota terminal, following a consent election held by the State of Mlmre§ota Conciliation Sermice and is presently negotiating with the Company conceuung it contract. 1300 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD supervisory employees within the meaning of our customary definition. We shall, therefore, exclude them from the unit. Clerks: The CIO would include the Company's clerks while the Teamsters would exclude them; the Company takes no position. Some of the clerks who are employed at the terminals prepare the bills of lading for orders to be filled, while others check these bills. Clerks were included in the unit found appropriate by the Board for super- intendent district No. 2, and also in the subsequent contract between the Company and the CIO. Unlike its present position, the Teamsters had, in the consent election held among the employees at the Des Moines, Iowa, terminal, also agreed to their inclusion. Under all the circumstances, we shall include the clerks in the unit. We find that all operating and maintenance employees of the Com- pany engaged in its superintendent district No. 3, including clerks, but .excluding telephone linemen, the district clerk, the chief terminal clerk, rack foremen, 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 Section 9 (b) of the Act. V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES The Company classifies as temporary employees those who are hired for odd jobs which usually are of short duration. In those instances where a temporary employee has worked 60 days in that capacity, it is the policy of the Company either to place hint on the permanent pay roll or to terminate his employment. The Company contends that all temporary employees be considered ineligible to vote but that all enn- .ployees listed on its permanent pay roll be permitted to vote regard- less of length of service. The.CIO, on the other hand, would consider as temporary employees and ineligible to vote all who have not been listed either on the permanent or temporary pay roll for 60 days. The Teamsters takes the position that all employees who have been on either pay roll for 30 days should be deemed eligible. Since it appears that the expectancy of permanent employment among these employees is rather conjectural, we shall declare the Company's temporary em- ployees ineligible to vote. Subsequent to the hearing, the CIO requested the Board to fix the eligibility date for voting as of September 1, 1945, for the reason that it anticipated a reduction by the Company of the work week and an attendant increase in the Company's personnel, effective September 23, 1945. The CIO argued in support of its position that the -new em- GREAT LAKES PIPE LINE COMPANY 1301 ployees will not be as qualified as the old regular employees in choosing a bargaining representative. We perceive no valid reason for predi- cating a regular employee's right to vote upon his length of service with the Company. The CIO's request is, accordingly, denied. We shall use our usual date to determine eligibility in the election. Although the showing of representation made by the Teamsters is confined to the Company's employees at its Des Moines, Iowa, termi- nal, we shall, nevertheless, inasmuch as an election is to be conducted among the Company's employees in superintendent district No. 3, accord the Teamsters a place on the ballot with permission to with- draw therefrom by notifying the Regional Director within ten (10) days after the issuance of this Decision and Direction of Election. 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. 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 Rela- tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby DIRIXTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain represent- atives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Great Lakes Pipe Line Company, Kansas City, Missouri, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than sixty (60) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervi- sion of the Regional Director for the Seventeenth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regula- tions, and our determinations in Section V, above, among the em- ployees in the unit found appropriate in Section IV, above, %vho 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 dale of the election, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Oil Workers International 1302 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Union, Local 348, affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organi- zations, or by Local 90 , International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, for the purposes of collective bar- gaining, or by neither. MR. GERARD D. REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election.