Continental Oil Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 24, 1949

85 N.L.R.B. 827 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter Of CONTINENTAL OIL COMPANY, EMPLOYER and INTER-
NATIONAL CHEMICAL WORKERS UNION, LOCAL No. 193, AFL,
PETITIONER
Case No. 15-RC-260.Decided August 24,1949
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Richard C.
Keenan, hearing officer. 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
this case to a three-member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members
Houston and Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees
of the Employer.
3. No 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, for the following
reasons:
In its petition the Petitioner requested a unit of all head roustabouts
employed by the Company in its field operations at Ville Platte,
Louisiana, but the record establishes that the Petitioner actually de-
sires the addition of the employees to the already existing production
and maintenance unit.
On February 22, 1945, the Petitioner was certified as the bargaining
representative of the production and maintenance workers employed
by the Company at its gasoline plant and field operations at Ville
Platte, Louisiana. The unit description excluded as supervisors those
"employees who have authority to hire, promote, discharge, discipline,
or otherwise effect changes in the status of employees or effectively
recommend such action." Head roustabouts were included within the
coverage of all contracts executed before the passage of the Labor
85 N. L . R, B., No. 140.
827
828 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Management Relations Act, 1947. During the 1948 negotiations lead-
ing up to the current contract, a dispute arose between the Union and
the Company concerning the supervisory status of the head roust-
abouts. The Company contended that they were supervisors under
the amended Act and refused to bargain concerning them.' The
Union thereafter filed the present petition. The sole question to be
determined here is whether the head roustabouts involved herein are
supervisors. If they are not, they may properly be included in the
already existing production and maintenance unit.'
The six head roustabouts in question are hourly paid employees who
receive 10-percent higher wages than first-class roustabouts. There is
no evidence that they have authority to hire employees in their own
name or effectively to recommend such hiring. Nor is there any evi-
dence that they have authority to discharge or lay off men in their
own name, although they have on occasion caused the transfer and
replacement of unsuitable assistants. It is probable that under the
definition contained in the original unit description the head roust-
abouts were not supervisors, and were properly included within the
bargaining unit. However, Section 2 (11) of the amended Act defines
"supervisor" in terms broader than those contained in that unit
description, so as to include "any individual having authority, in the
interest of the employer . . . to assign . . . or responsibly to direct
[other employees] . . . if the exercise of such the authority . . . re-
quires the use of independent judgment." The record demonstrates
that the head roustabouts are in charge of gangs of 1 to 12 men whose
work they supervise and direct.3 Although they are given general
instructions for particular field operations, they exercise independent
judgment in the performance of their regular tasks and in the assign-
ment of jobs to their crews. They have complete charge of the gangs
when on the field.
In these circumstances, we find that the head roustabouts are super-
visors as defined in the amended Act 4 Accordingly we shall dismiss
the petition herein.
ORDER
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and upon the entire
record in this case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders
that the petition in this case be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
1 The Union thereupon filed a charge in Case No. 15-CA-90, alleging an unlawful refusal
to bargain, but withdrew the charge with the approval of the Regional Director, on an
understanding that the propriety of the inclusion of the head roustabouts would be
determined in a representation proceeding.
2 Matter of Inter-Island Steam Navigation Co., Ltd., 61 N. L. R. B. 988, 990.
2 See Matter of Atlas Tag Company, 84 N. L. R. B. 685.
4 See Matter of Lloyd Corporation, Ltd., 79 N. L. R. B. 1477.