The Standard Oil Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 29, 1964

146 N.L.R.B. 1189 (N.L.R.B. 1964)

THE STANDARD OIL CO. (OHIO) (AKRON DIVISION) 1189
ping department employees and the janitress ,' and excluding office employees
and all guards, professional employees , and supervisors , as defined in the
National Labor Relations Act.
WE WILL NOT offer any proposals for a contract or for clauses or changes
in a contract or in working . conditions except directly to said union and
will not make any changes concerning them except after first notifying,
consulting with , and negotiating in good faith with said Union concerning
the same..
WE WILL NOT try to discredit the Union by going back on promises to or
agreements made with it , or by making promises to or agreements with
the Union, with the preconceived intention of. backing out on them.
WE WILL NOT threaten to close . the plant . rather than comply with our
obligation to notify and bargain with the union in respect to any change of
working conditions.
WE WILL NOT promise any of our employees benefits to induce them, or
threaten any of our employees with more stringent conditions , or discrim-
inate against them in respect to our policy concerning leaves of absence
or any other policy, in order to coerce them , into abandoning the Union in
favor of dealing individually with us.
WE WILL NOT in any other manner interfere with the efforts of said
Union to represent you and to bargain for and negotiate working conditions
on your behalf , nor will we in any other manner seek to obstruct the
bargaining process.
WE SHALL respect your rights under the National Labor Relations Act
and shall make every reasonable effort to give the bargaining relationship
with the Union a fair chance to succeed by bargaining with it in an honest ef-
fort and with a genuine intention of arriving at an agreement , and by re-
ducing to writing and signing any agreement we arrive at, and honoring its
terms.
WABANA, INC.,
Employer.
Dated------------------- By-------------------------------------------
(Representative ) ( Title)
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered , defaced , or covered by any other material.
If any employees have any questions concerning what the above notice means or
requires, they may get in touch with the Board 's Regional Office , 614 ISTA Center,
150 West Market Street , Indianapolis , Indiana , Telephone No. Melrose 3-8921, in
person, by telephone , or by mail.
The Standard Oil Company ( Ohio ) (Akron Division ) and Akron-
Youngstown Petroleum Workers
The Standard Oil; Company (Ohio ) (Youngstown Division) and
Akron-Youngstown Petroleum Workers. Cases Nos. 8-RC-4745
and 8-RC-4747.• April 29, 1964
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
On June 22 and August 10, 1962, respectively, Akron-Youngstown
Petroleum .Workers, the Petitioner herein, was certified as collective-
bargaining representative of two identical bargaining units of opera-
tions and maintenance employees of 'the Akron and Youngstown sales
divisions of the Employer, including, among others, drivers.
On November 6, 11963, the Petitioner filed separate motions to clarify
certifications with respect to whether certain individuals classified as
"distributors" and "consignment distributors" in .the Employer's
146 NLRB No. 148.
1190 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Akron and Youngstown sales divisions were included in the respec-
tive certified units. Thereafter, the Board issued an order remanding
the proceeding to the Regional Director for the Eighth Region to con-
duct a hearing on the issues raised by Petitioner in its requests for
clarification. A hearing was held at Akron and Youngstown, Ohio,
between January 28 and February 6, 1964, before Hearing Officer
Nora Friel. The Hearing Officer's rulings made at the hearing are
free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
these proceedings to a three-member panel [Members Leedom, Fan-
ning, and Brown].
Upon the entire record in these cases, the Board finds :
In the Akron sales division, there are 4 distributors and 2 consign-
ment distributors and, in the Youngstown sales division, there are 18
distributors known as tank truck distributors. Of the 72 employees
in the certified unit at Akron, 32 are company drivers, and of the 52
employees in the certified unit at Youngstown, 36. are company
drivers.
Company drivers operate tractor-trailers owned by Employer, are
paid on an hourly basis, and serve gas stations, industrial plants, and
other heavy consumers with large storage tanks. The distributors in
issue use small tank trucks and serve farm and residential consumers
who have limited storage capacity. Both classes of distributors.
operate under an agreement with the Employer by which they sell
and deliver Standard Oil products for which they are paid on a com-.
mission basis. The chief distinctions between the distributors and
the consignment distributors lies in the ownership of the trucks they
drive-the distributors owning theirs and the consignment distributors
leasing theirs from the Employer-and in the fact that consignment
distributors operate only in the peak season during the winter months.
The Petitioner contends that persons working under the titles of
"distributor" and "consignment distributor" are drivers within the
unit description and employees rather than independent contractors.
The Employer contends that distributors of both types are inde-
pendent contractors and, in any event, have an insufficient community
of interests with the employees in the unit to justify their inclusion in
the unit.
The record indicates that persons in the categories of distributors
were not on the eligibility list and did not vote in the election which
resulted in certification of the Petitioner, although the Employer had
utilized the services of distributors prior to the advent of the Union.
Neither the contract executed subsequent to the current certification
nor any previous contract with predecessors of the Petitioner covered.
distributors of either type. An officer of the Petitioner testified at
LOCAL 58, INT'L BROTHERHOOD ELECTRICAL WORKERS 1191
the hearing that it had not occurred to union representatives that
distributors might be employees rather than independent contractors
until he was so advised by the union attorney in the fall of 1963. It
thus appears that there was an intent to exclude those in question
from the certified units and that the distributors have been without
representation since.
Clarification of a certification or amendment of a unit description
may be in order where a new employee classification has been created,
or an employer's operations have been expanded subsequent to a cer-
tification, and the employees involved are normal accretions to the
certified unit.' Here, however, the categories of distributor and con-
signment or fuel oil distributor are not new, since they antedate the
certification by many years, and it is not even alleged that their duties
have undergone such change as would be tantamount to the creation
of a new classification. Thus, even if the distributors were found to be
employees rather than independent contractors, a question we need
not decide, we believe that they do not constitute an accretion to
the existing unit. The proper procedure for accomplishing Peti-
tioner's purpose in the instant matter is a petition filed pursuant to
Section 9(c) of the Act, seeking an election rather than a motion for
clarification,' and we shall therefore dismiss the instant proceedings.
[The Board dismissed the motions for clarification of certifications
in Cases Nos. 8-RC-4745 and 8-RC-4747.]
'Brockton-Taunton Gas Company , 132 NLRB 940.
2 Westinghouse Electric Corporation , 142 NLRB 317.
Local 58, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,
AFL-CIO and Guardian Building Company. Case No. 7-CD-90.
April 29, 1964
DECISION AND DETERMINATION OF DISPUTE
This is a proceeding pursuant to Section 10(k) of the National
Labor Relations Act, following a charge filed on June 26, 1963, by
Guardian Building Company, herein called the Employer, alleging
that Local 58, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-
CIO, herein called IBEW or Respondent, had violated Section
8(b) (4) (D) of the Act. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was held be-
fore Hearing Officer Harry D. Camp, beginning on October 25 and
ending on October 31, 1963. All parties appeared at the hearing and
were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-
examine witnesses , and to adduce evidence bearing on the issues. The
rulings of the Hearing Officer made at the hearing are free from
146 NLRB No. 144.