Southern California Gas Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Dec 12, 1946

71 N.L.R.B. 979 (N.L.R.B. 1946)

In the Matter of SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY, EMPLOYER and
UTILITY WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, LOCAL 132, CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 21-R-3-543.-Decided December 10, 1946
Mr. R. R. Blackburn, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Employer.
Katz, Gallagher c Margolis, by Mrs. Thelma S. Herzig, of Los
Angeles, Calif., for the Petitioner.
Mr. William B. Esterman, of Los Angeles, Calif., for the Intervenor.
Mr. Ralph Winkler, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Los
Angeles, California, on October 8,1946, before Charles M. Ryan, hear-
ing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free
from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. At the hearing the
Employer made two motions to dismiss the petition on the grounds (1)
that it is not engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act, and
(2) that the guards involved in this proceeding are not employees
within the Act's definition. The hearing officer referred these motions
to the Board. For reasons stated hereinafter the motions are hereby
denied.
Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations
Board makes the following:
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER
Southern California Gas Company is a California corporation with
its principal office and place of business located at Los Angeles, Cali-
fornia. It is engaged primarily in the business of purchasing, trans-
porting, selling, and distributing natural gas for light, heat, and power
purposes in the central and southern portions of the State of California.
It is also engaged to a moderate extent in manufacturing, transporting,
selling, and distributing manufactured gas. As an incident to its
principal business, the Employer sells gas appliances at retail. The
chief raw material used by the Employer in its operations is natural
71 N. L. R. B., No. 165
979
980 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
gas, all of which is purchased within the State of California. In
addition, it purchases other raw materials including pipe meters, reg-
ulators, and similar items. Of these materials, amounts in the value of
approximately $1,000,000 annually are purchased outside the State of
California. Omitting the value of the natural gas purchased by the
Employer, this figure constitutes approximately one-third of the total
value of all other raw materials purchased by the Employer. All
products sold by the Employer are sold within the State of California.
The Company supplies gas to major industrial firms in southern Cali-
fornia and to a number of instrumentalities engaged in interstate com-
merce.'
We find, contrary to its contention, that the Employer is engaged in
commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. TIIE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress
of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the
Employer.
Building Service Employees International Union, Local 193, Spe-
cial Officers, Guards, and Watchmen, herein called the Intervenor, is
a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor,
claiming to represent employees of the Employer.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive
bargaining representative of a unit of guards, contending (1) that the
guards are not employees within the meaning of the Act; and (2) that
the Petitioner represents the Employer's rank-and-file employees and
is therefore precluded from representing the guards.
The guards are employees of and paid by the Employer. They are
engaged primarily in plant protection. Their duties require them to
apprehend individuals breaking into the plant, committing acts of
sabotage, or otherwise attempting to destroy or damage the plant; to
maintain discipline; to report infractions of plant rules by other em-
ployees; and, if necessary, to make arrests. They are armed and have
the status of special police under the jurisdiction of the Los Angeles
Police Department. When performing company duties on the Em-
ployer's premises, the guards are under the Employer's control.
We have al ready determined that employees performing duties simi-
lar to those outlined above do not, for that reason, lose their employee
status under the Act.2 We have also held that employees engaged in
1 These jurisdictional facts, stipulated by the parties in the present case, have been found
by the Board in an earlier proceeding Matte, of Southern California Gas Company, 65
N. L. R. B. 543, 544
2 Matter of Seeger-Sunbeam Coapoiat,on, Evansville Divisien, 69 N L R B 985. See
also, the cases cited in footnote 3, below.
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY 981
such occupation are not to be denied their statutory right to designate
as their bargaining representative a labor organization which also
represents other categories of employees.3
Accordingly, we find that a question affecting, commerce has arisen
concerning the representation of employees of the Employer, within
the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT
We find, as the parties stipulated, that all guards employed in the
Employer's northern, southern, and central divisions, all of which are
located in Los Angeles County, but excluding guard inspectors, chief
guards, and all other 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.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with Southern California Gas Company,
Los Angeles, California, 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 Twenty-first Region, acting in this matter as agent for
the National Labor Relations Board, and subject to Sections 203.55 and
203.56, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-
Series 4, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in Sec-
tion IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period im-
mediately 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 those employees 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 they desire to be repre-
sented by Utility Workers Union of America, Local 132, CIO, or by
Building Service Employees International Union, Local 193, Special
Officers, Guards, and Watchmen, AFL, for the purposes of collective
bargaining, or by neither.
3 Matter of Monsanto Chemical Company, 71 N L R B 11 , Matter of Cudahy Packing
Company, 65 N. L. R. B. 10, 12; Matter of Craig Shtipbuilding Company, 65 N I, R B 97
Matter of Solar Manufacturing Corporation, 65 N L. R B. 1366, 1368
982 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
MR. JAMES J. REYNOLDS, JR., dissenting :
For the reasons stated in my dissenting opinion in the Monsanto,
Chemical Company case,4 which I find equally applicable here, I would
dismiss the present petition.
4 71 N. L. R. B. 11.