Kaw Pipeline Co.

In the Matter of KAW PIPELINE COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTERNA- TIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, A. F. L., PETITIONER Case No. 17-R-1704.-Decided April 23, 1947 Messrs. Douglas Howard, of Houston, Tex., and D. C. Russell, of Russell, Kans., for the Employer. Mr. J. E. Gilliland, of Hutchinson, Kans., for the Petitioner. Mr. Herbert C. Kane, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at Russell, Kansas, on February 5, 1947, before Robert S. Fousek, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju- dicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER Kaw Pipeline Company, a Delaware corporation having its prin- cipal office in Tulsa, Oklahoma, operates in the State of Kansas a pipe line through which crude oil produced in the State is transported to the tanks of The Texas Company, Cities Service Oil Company, and Phillips Petroleum Company, among others, within the State. During the 12-month period ending October 31,1946, the Employer transported a total of 29,446,949 barrels of crude oil. A substantial amount of the oil delivered to these three named companies was subsequently transported t6 points outside the State of Kansas. The Employer admits and we find that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act. H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED The Petitioner is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Em- ployer. 73 N. L. R. B., No. 103. 508 KAW PIPELINE COMPANY III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION 509 , The Employer refuses to recognize the Petitioner as the exclusive bargaining representative of employees of the Employer until the Pe- titioner has been certified by the Board in an appropriate unit. 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 The parties agree that a unit of all operating and maintenance em- ployees of the Employer, excluding superintendents , district foremen, assistant district foremen, gang foremen, assistant gang foremen, welder foremen, division engineers (civil), junior civil engineers, chief tour engineers , chief electric station operators , chief delivery gaugers-engineers , chief gaugers and tank strappers, troubleman-elec- trician, troublemen, chief clerks, senior clerks, clerks (assistant to district foremen), junior clerks, junior clerks ( trainees), right-of- way and claim agents, assistant right-of-way and claim agents, and all technical , administrative , clerical, and supervisory employees. They disagree, however, with respect to assistant master mechanics, district gaugers and relief district gaugers , all of which categories the Employer desires to exclude and the Petitioner to include. Assistant master mechanics : The Employer desires the exclusion ,of these employees on the ground that they are supervisors. There are four assistant master mechanics . Each assistant master mechanic is responsible for the proper operation of the mechanical equipment in a given geographical area. In addition to the assistant master me- chanic, the Employer employs one shop mechanic for each district. When routine repairs are needed, the assistant mechanic is assisted by local station engineers ; when the work to be done is more extensive, upon request to the district foreman, members of the "gang " are sent to assist him. The assistant master mechanic directs the work of the men working under him, although he does all the precision work him- elf. He maintains discipline among the crew men and may effectively recommend a change in their status . We find that these assistant mas- ter mechanics are supervisory employees within the Board's customary definition and we shall, therefore, exclude them from the unit. District gaugers, relief district gaugers: It appears that the duties of the relief district gaugers are identical with those of the district gaugers whom they relieve, and we here make no differentiation be- tween them. The Employer desires that these employees be excluded from the unit on the ground that they are both managerial and super- visory employees. The Petitioner desires their inclusion as operating employees. 510 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD There are approximately 30 district gaugers and 10 relief district gaugers. They arrange for the transfer of crude oil from the tanks of leaseholders into the pipe lines of the Employer. The Kansas State Corporation Commission issues a monthly report setting forth the amount of crude oil which each leaseholder may ship during that pe- riod. It is the gauger's duty to permit oil to enter the pipe line within the allowances set by the State Commission. In all cases, save where the leaseholder has signed a waiver, the gauger and the leaseholder's representative meet at the lease and check the amount of oil in the tank before and after the run is made, and each signs the run ticket. The run ticket is a receipt for the amount of oil and the leaseholder is paid on the basis of the run ticket issued. The gauger tests the oil for basic sediment, water, specific gravity, and temperature and then decides whether or not to accept the oil. Under the standards established by the Employer, the gauger has little discretion un making his de- cision. It is only in borderline cases that his judgment comes into play. If he rejects any oil, his decision is subject to being overruled by his superior. The gauger also makes daily and monthly reports on oil runs and is generally responsible for seeing that the equipment in his, area is in workable condition. As previously stated, the Employer contends that the gaugers are managerial employees. We do not agree. We are of the opinion that the duties of the district gauger are purely mi isterial. He reports definitely ascertainable facts and exercises no such discretion or inde- pendent judgment as would make him a managerial employee. In most of the districts there are stationary engineers who operate the stationary and portable pumps. In 9 of the districts, however, there are no engineers and the district gaugers do both gauging and engineering work. There is, however, a conflict in testimony as to the alleged supervisory functions of the gaugers. The Employer main- tains that the gaugers have the power to make effective recommenda- tions concerning the change in status of the stationary engineers work- ing in their district. A district foreman of the Employer testified that an independent investigation follows such recommendation and that no, district gauger ever recommended that a man be discharged. A gauger testified that he had attempted to change the hours of work of the engineers in his district and was informed by the district foreman that he was exceeding his authority. The Employer maintains that the approximately 40 gaugers exercise supervisory authority over the 55 to 60 engineers. It is significant to note that there are approxi- mately 15 admitted supervisors for the 140 prod action employees, in- cluding the stationary engineers. The record reveals that the district gauger can tell the engineer what to do in that he informs him of the 1 Matter of The Texas Pipeline Company, 55 N. L R B 239. KAW PIPELINE COMPANY 511 amount of oil which is to be run but that lie cannot give orders as to the method by which the work is to be accomplished. If the district gauger is dissatisfied or disagrees with the method employed by the engineer, he may make a factual report to the district foreman. Such report, which is followed by an independent investigation, may result in action so as to change the status of the -engineer. The district gauger signs the time cards and mileage reports of the engineers. There is no indication, however, as to the basis upon which these cards are set up or that the gauger has firsthand knowledge of their accuracy. The Employer emphasizes the fact that gaugers attended foremen's meetings until they were discontinued in 1942. This fact is not deter- minative. We are of the opinion on the basis of all the evidence that district gaugers and relief district gaugers are not supervisory em- ployees within the Board's customary definition. We shall, accord- ingly, include them in the unit.2 We find that all operating and maintenance employees of the Em- ployer, including district gaugers and relief district gaugers, but ex- cluding assistant master mechanics, superintendents, district foremen, assistant district forennen, gang foremen, assistant gang foremen, weld- er foremen, division engineers (civil), junior civil engineers, chief tour engineers, chief electric station operators, chief delivery gaugers- engineers, chief gaugers and tank strappers, troubleman-electrician, troublemen, chief clerks, senior clerks, clerks (assistant to district foremen), junior clerks, junior clerks (trainees), right-of-way and claim agents, assistant right-of-way and claim agents, and all technical, administrative and clerical employees, and supervisory employees with authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees, or effectively recommend such ac- tion, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bar- gaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Ka-%v Pipeline Company, Tulsa, Oklahoma, 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 Direc- tor for the Seventeenth 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 mi- 2 of Magnolia Pipe Line Company, 61 N L R B 723, Matter of The Texas Pipe- line Company, 55 N. L. R B 239. 739926-47-vol. 73-34 Z12 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 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 A o the date of the election, to determine whether or not- they desire ,to be represented by International Union of Operating Engineers, A. F. L., for the purposes of collective bargaining.