National Cylinder Gas Co. of Texas

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 12, 1951

95 N.L.R.B. 168 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

168 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The only issues in this case relate to the inclusion in the unit of the
night superintendent and the determination of the supervisory status
of Webster Spragg.
Spragg 2 performs the same duties as the other employees, under
the supervision of the plant manager. In the absence of the manager,
he directs the other employees and has the power to discharge them,
subject to review of the discharges by the plant manager upon his
return. There was no evidence, however, as to the frequency of the
manager's absences from the plant. Under these circumstances, and
upon the entire record, we find that Spragg is not a supervisor and
will include him in the unit.
The night superintendent 3 is employed in the locker room, under
the direct supervision of the plant manager. He is employed from
4 p. m. to 10 p. in., to sweep out the locker room, close it up at night,
and watch for intruders. He also spends about 2 hours of his working
day watching and regulating the valves in the "cold room." We find,
upon the record, that the night superintendent spends the major por-
tion of his time in performing the duties of a guard, and will there-
fore exclude him from the unit.
We find that all the stationary engineers and ice pullers at the
Employer's Hollister, California, plant, excluding the night super-
intendent, the butcher,4 office employees, and supervisors, constitute
a unit appropriate for collective bargaining purposes within the
meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
2 Although no party contended that Spragg is a supervisor , evidence was taken bearing
on his authority over the other employees.
3 The parties took no position on the inclusion of this employee , but submitted the
question to the Board.
4 The parties agreed to the exclusion of this employee from the unit.
NATIONAL CYLINDER GAS COMPANY OF TEXAS and OIL WORKERS IN-
TERNATIONAL UNION, CIO, PETITIONER. Cases Nos. 16-RC-699
and 16-RC-734. July 12, 1951
Decision and Direction of Election
Upon petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before H. Carnie
Russell, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the
hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.,
'The hearing officer granted the Petitioner's motion to amend its petition with respect
to the description of the appropriate unit. The Employer objected to the hearing officer's
ruling on the ground that it did not comply with the Board' s regulations concerning
95 NLRB No. 26.
NATIONAL CYLINDER GAS COMPANY OF TEXAS 169
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel .[Members Houston, Reynolds, and Styles].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer, a Texas corporation, is a wholly owned subsidiary
and an integral part of National Cylinder Gas Company, a Nation-
wide enterprise, and is engaged in the manufacture and distribution
of oxygen, nitrogen, and acetylene. During the, past year the Em-
ployer- purchased raw materials consisting of carbide, acetone, acti-
vated alumina, and caustic potash of a value in excess of $250,000,
approximately 90 percent of which was received from points outside
the State of Texas. For the same period the Employer produced
finished products of avalue in excess of $1,000,000, approximately 5
percent of which was shipped to points without the State of Texas.
The Employer neither admits nor denies that it is engaged in com-
merce. On the facts above, we find that the Employer is engaged in
commerce within the meaning of the Act, and that it will effectuate
the policies of the Act to assert jurisdiction in this case 2
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9
(c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The appropriate unit :
The Employer is administratively divided into several districts in
Texas, only two of which-the Dallas and the Lubbock districts-are
involved in this proceeding. Within the Dallas district, there is a
branch at Fort Worth consisting of an oxygen plant, and a branch at
Dallas consisting of an oxygen and nitrogen plant and an acetylene
plant. The finished products are distributed from these two branches
and from a third branch at Wichita Falls, which is solely devoted to
distribution and does not have a production plant. Within the Lub-
bock district there is an oxygen plant and an acetylene plant at the
Lubbock branch. The finished products are distributed from this
branch and from the Odessa branch, which, like the Wichita Falls
branch, is solely concerned with distribution.
The Petitioner seeks separate units of all production, maintenance,
and distribution employees- of the Employer at each of the two dis-
tricts described above.' ,
sufficiency of notice . However, all parties were afforded full opportunity to litigate
any issues raised by the amendnent to the original petition, and the Employer has not
shown in what respect, if any, it was prejudiced by the granting of the amendment.
Accordingly , we affirm the hearing officer's ruling. Maring- Crawford Motor Company,
94 NLRB No . 162; United States Time Corporation , 86 NLRB 724.
2 Stanislaus Implement and Hardware Company, Limited , 91 NLRB 618.
170 DECISIONS ' OF: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Employer contends that only separate units for the Fort Worth,
Dallas, and Lubbock branches are appropriate and that the Wichita
Falls and Odessa branches would not constitute separate appropriate
units, nor should they be included in any other unit that might be
found appropriate. .
A branch manager is directly in charge of the operations at each
of the branches in the Dallas district. The hours of work and the
time to report for work are governed locally. The branch manager
has the authority to hire and discharge employees and there. is very
little interchange of employees between branches.
In view of these facts it appears that individual branch units might
well be appropriate. However, we do not believe that such units are
the only ones appropriate in the circumstances. Other factors demon-
strate that district-wide units as sought by the Petitioner are likewise
appropriate. Thus the employees at all of the branches within each
district have similar duties and working conditions and common in-
terests in the manufacture and distribution of the Employer's prod-
ucts; inventory and accounting is maintained at district level; a dis-
trict manager is in -complete charge of the Employer's operations for
each district and establishes common labor policies on a district-wide
basis. In view of these factors as well as the fact that there has been
no collective bargaining by any of the employees of the Employer
within either of the districts involved, we conclude that the district-
wide units sought by the Petitioner are appropriate .3 Moreover, in
view of the.functional integration of the operations at Wichita Falls
and Odessa, and the interests which the employees there located have
in common with the other employees in their respective districts, we
perceive no reason for excluding the employees at these branches from
the units.
Accordingly, we find the following units to be appropriate for the
purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act, exchiding, in each case, office clerical employees, salesmen,
guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act : -
. (a) All production, maintenance, and distribution employees of
the Employer in the Dallas, Texas, district.
(b) All, production, maintenance, and distribution employees of
the Employer in the Lubbock, Texas, district.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication in this
volume.]
3 The Borden Company , Hutchinson Ice Cream Division , 89 NLRB 227 ; Porto Rican
Express Company , 88 NLRB 866.