The Eureka Pipe Line Co.

THE EUREKA PIPE LINE COMPANY 13 The Eureka Pipe Line Company and Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers International Union, AFL-CIO,' Petitioner. Case No. 9-RC-558. January 6,1956 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before George LoVerde, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. Upon the entire record in this case, the Board funds : 1. The Employer is a West Virginia corporation engaged in the transportation of crude oil through pipelines located wholly within the State. Its lines connect at the Ohio border with those of the Buckeye Pipe Line Company and at the Pennsylvania border with those of the National Transit Company, thereby making the Em- ployer's lines an integral part of a system of oil transportation lines which ultimately reach back to midcontinent and Texas fields. The Employer is engaged in two types of operations-trunkline opera- tions and gathering operations. Gathering operations consist of collecting crude oil at the wells or storage tanks of producers in West Virginia fields. Trunkline operations consist of the delivery of oil gathered within the State to National Transit Company- the connecting carrier at the Pennsylvania border-for ultimate de- livery to refineries in other States and the movement of oil received from Buckeye Pipe Line Company at the Ohio border to refineries within the State or to National Transit Company at the opposite State line. The Employer owns the pipelines and pumping stations it operates but not the oil which moves through them. Its revenues consist entirely of payments received for the transportation of oil. A pre- ponderance of these revenues for the last fiscal year were received from two West Virginia refineries for gathering and delivering to them oil from West Virginia fields. In addition, however, these re- fineries paid the Employer $47,500 for trunkline services, that is, serv- ices the Employer rendered in moving to their refineries oil received from the connecting, carriers. And the Employer received from the connecting carriers about $80,000 for gathering and trunk-line opera- tions resulting in the movement of oil either to or from the lines of these carriers at the borders of the State. We find that the services the Employer performs in transporting oil to and from the lines of connecting carriers at the boundaries of 1 The AFL and CIO having merged subsequent to the heating in this proceeding, we are amending the identification of the afliation of Petitioner 115 NLRB No. 5. 14 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the State constitute a link in the chain of interstate commerce.2 As the Employer annually receives revenues in excess of $100,000 as compensation for these services, we further find, contrary to the con- tentions of the Employer, that the Board' s assertion of jurisdiction over the Employer will effectuate the purposes of the Act.3 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 parties stipulated that the unit sought by Petitioner is appro- priate and disagree only as to the unit placement of Assistant Construc- tion Foreman Grump in the Fairview district. Petitioner contends Grump is a supervisor.4 The record shows that Grump was given the title of assistant construction foreman so that employees assigned to him by the construction foreman would be aware of his authority to give them orders in the performance of their duties. The Employer's president testified that Grump is required to use his own initiative in directing the work of these employees and that he receives $21 a month more than they do. The Employer's president also testified that Grump does not have the authority to hire, discharge, or discipline employees or to effectively recommend such actions. On the basis of the foregoing, however, we are persuaded and find that Grump re- sponsibly directs the work of employees under his control and is there- fore a supervisor within the meaning of the Act. Accordingly, we shall exclude him from the unit.5 The parties stipulated that ''casual" employees should be excluded from the unit. The employees the Employer so designates are 7 laborers, 3 of whom were employed less than 6 months before the hear- ing in this proceeding ; the other 4 were employed 6 to 12 months before the hearing. The Employer seems to consider them casual employees because it is understood when they are hired that they are not perma- nent employees, they do not share the fringe employment benefits pro- vided for regular employees, and. some, but not all, of them are paid 5 cents an hour less than permanent,employees doing like work. How- ever, these employees are continuously employed, they consistently work a full workweek, they perform the same work as the Employer's 2 Compare Kenedy Compress Company, 114 NLRB 634 ; Dallas Transfer & Terminal Warehouse Company, 114 NLRB 18; Etiwan Fertilazet' Company, 113 NLRB 93. 3 Breeding Transfer Company, 110 NLRB 493 , at 494; Edelen Transfer and Storage Company, Inc., 110 NLRB 1881 , at 1883. 4 The parties stipulated that the other assistant construction foreman employed in the Blue Creek division is a supervisor and should therefore be excluded from the unit. 5 Sunnyland Packing Company, 113 NLRB 162. HOLLINGSWORTH & WHITNEY DIVISION - 15 other laborers, and in the past a great majority of the employees so designated have become permanent employees. Furthermore, about 5 of these 7 employees have been previously employed by the Em- ployer as casual laborers. The full-time, continuous employment of these "casual" laborers, the lack of distinction between their work and that of other of the Employer's employees, and the reasonable likelihood-that they will continue indefinitely in the employ of the Employer all clearly demonstrates that the employment of these la- borers is not "casual" as the Board uses that term." Their exclusion from the unit would clearly contravene Board policy.' Accordingly, we shall include them in the unit despite the stipulation of the parties to the contrary e For the foregoing reasons we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of col- lective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All production, maintenance and construction employees employed in the Employer's West Virginia pipeline operations, including gaugers, engineers, assistant shop men, station foremen, deliverymen, linemen, laborers,9 telegraph operators, and the operator and iron tank gauger; but excluding office clerical employees, district foremen, construction foremen, the construction foreman and gauger, all assistant construc- tion foremen, and all supervisors as defined in the Act. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] "American Factors, Limited, 109 NLRB 834, at 837-838; Rollo,,Transit Corporation, 110 NLRB 1623, at 1627 7 See Fort Worth Stockyards, 109 NLRB 1452, at 1453, imperial Rice Hills, Inc, 110 NLRB 612, at 613 8 The Yale and Towne Manufacturing Company, 112 NLRB 1268 9 Included in this category are the laborers referred to by the parties as casual employees Hollingsworth & Whitney Division of Scott Paper Company and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, AFL-CIO,' Petitioner. Cases Nos.15-RC-1248,15-RC-1241, and 15-RC-1250. January 6,1956 DECISION AND ORDER Upon separate petitions duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a consolidated hearing was held before Fred A. Lewis, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed. 1 As the AFL and CIO merged subsequent to the hearing in these cases , we are taking notice thereof and amending the Petitioner's and Joint Intervenors' (see footnote 3 below) names 115 NLRB No. 6.