Hamilton Gas Corporation, Employer And Oil Workers International Union, Cio, Petitioner, 269 (1947)

In the Matter Of HAMILTON GAS CORPORATION, EMPLOYER and OIL WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, CIO, PETITIONER Case No. 9-R-1986.---Decided January 24, 1.947 Steptoe & Johnson, by Mr. Guy Farm~er, of Washington, D. C., and Mr. Lloyd Leckie, of Charleston, W. Va.; and Mr. Charles W. Rockhold, -of Charleston, W. Va., for the Employer.

Mr. William V.* Flower, of Toledo, Ohio, f or the Petitioner.

Mr. Warren H. Leland, of counsel to the Board.

DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition dully filed, hearing in this case was held at Charleston, West Virginia, on September 4, 1946,. before William 0. Murdock', hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the bearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.

Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following:

FINDINGS oF, FACT I. THE BtTS1NESS OF THE EMPLOYER Hamilton Gas Corporation, a West Virginia corporation with its principal office in Charleston, West Virginia, is engaged in the production and sale of natural gas. The Employer operates gas wells in central and southern West Virginia and in eastern Kentucky.' It delivers the gas which it produces and purchases for resale, principally to various gas public utility companies, which receive and take title to the gas 'at or near its wells. These purchasers transport the gas through their own gas lines to their main transmission pipe lines. It would appear that they are themselves engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. During the 12-month period ending July 31, 1946, the Employer produced and purchased f or resale approximately 3,927,362 M cubic feet of gas, valued at about $510,000, all of which the Employer sold.

1The Employer does not transport any gas across State lines.

We find that the Employer's operations affect commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.

2. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, claiming to represent employees of the Employer.

3. THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT The Petitioner seeks a unit comprised of all production and maintenance employees of the Employer's Eastern Division, excluding certain casual laborers, clerical employees and supervisory employees.

   The Employer, on the other hand, contends that the unit sought is improper, and urges in its brief that the appropriate grouping should consist of all its production and maintenance employees together with...