Petroleum Helicopters, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 30, 1970

184 N.L.R.B. 60 (N.L.R.B. 1970)

60 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Petroleum Helicopters , Inc. and International As-
sociation of Machinists & Aerospace Workers,
AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case 15-RC-4328
June 30, 1970
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By MEMBERS FANNING, MCCULLOCH, AND JENKINS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of
the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a
hearing was held before Hearing Officer A. Richard
Gear. The Employer alone has filed a brief. An
order has been issued transferring the case to the
Board for decision.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
Act, the National Labor Relations Board has
delegated its powers in connection with this case to
a three-member panel.
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's
rulings made at the hearing and finds that they are
free from prejudicial error. They are hereby af-
firmed.
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board
finds.
L The Employer, Petroleum Helicopter, Inc , is
a Delaware corporation with its principal place of
business in Lafayette, Louisiana. The Employer is
engaged in the business of furnishing helicopter ser-
vices primarily to the petroleum industry. It
operates throughout the United States and abroad.
The parties do not contest the Board's jurisdic-
tion. The Employer admits, and the facts in the
record indicate, that it is engaged in interstate com-
merce within the meaning of the Act.
Accordingly, we find that the Employer is an em-
ployer within the meaning of Section 2(2) of the
Act,' and shall assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The labor organization involved claims to
represent certain employees of the Employer.
3. A question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning the representation of employees of the Em-
ployer within the meaning of Section 9(c)( I) and
Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner requests a unit of all pilots
based in the United States and all mechanic-pilots,
excluding mechanics, operations employees, office
and plant clerical employees, guards, and lead
pilots and other supervisors as defined in the Act.
The Petitioner took no position on the unit place-
ment of the pilots operating out of foreign bases or
of radio traffic control employees.
The Employer contends that a unit of all of its
employees is the appropriate unit, including lead
pilots and plant clerical employees, but excluding
office clerical employees.
Most of the Employer's pilots are based in Mor-
gan City, Louisiana. The main hiring and training
center is at its headquarters located at Lafayette,
Louisiana. Approximately 15 pilots are on tempora-
ry assignments in foreign countries, for tours of
duty ranging from a couple of weeks to sometimes
as long as a year and a half. The pilots assigned to
foreign service are treated and considered the same
as the U.S.-based pilots of the Employer and retain
their seniority, even though the pilots in Ecuador,
and perhaps in other foreign countries, are techni-
cally required by local law to be on the payroll of a
local company. The pilots' duties consist of operat-
ing helicopters in servicing offshore rigs and trans-
porting personnel and supplies. The primary
responsibility of the pilots is to fly the helicopters.
The mechanic-pilots spend a great majority of their
time in flying helicopters but because of their
mechanical background they also inspect helicop-
ters and certify whether the helicopters are fit for
flying. The Employer considers them to be pilots
and gives them the same pay as the other pilots In
view of the fact that the mechanic-pilots are
qualified pilots and in fact spend over 50 percent of
their time flying helicopters, we find them to be
pilots
In view of the foregoing and the record as a
whole, it is apparent that the pilots and mechanic-
pilots have specialized skills and an identifiable
community of interests significantly different from
those of the other employees. This justifies their
representation in a separate unit We find that all
the pilots, both foreign and domestic, including
mechanic-pilots, constitute a unit appropriate for
collective bargaining.
We exclude from the unit the other employees:
mechanics, clerical employees, radio traffic control
operators, and operations employees These em-
ployees are paid hourly, are separately supervised,
do not require the specialized experience required
of pilots, and have no interchange with the pilots.
Further, no labor organization seeks to represent
them.
The parties stipulated that the chief pilot be ex-
cluded as a supervisor. The parties disagreed, how-
ever, as to the following pilots, whom the Employer
would include but the Petitioner would exclude.
Pilots Davenport, Butte, and Allen
Dave Davenport ( assistant operations official)
' Sec Air California, 170 NLRB 18
184 NLRB No. 8
PETROLEUM HELICOPTERS, INC.
flies only on special assignment rather than being
assigned a particular aircraft and a routine
schedule. Merlin Butte and Doug Allen (test and
trainer pilots) spend most of their time testing air-
craft, making proficiency checks, and training new
pilots. The Employer wants them included in the
unit because they perform functions which are re-
lated to and identified with the pilots. The Union
asserts that the three pilots should be excluded as
supervisors, but the record is devoid of evidence to
establish their supervisory status. We include these
three pilots in the unit.
Lead Pilots
The Petitioner maintains that the 11 lead pilots
are supervisors and should be excluded from the
unit of pilots. They are in charge of the Employer's
many bases. They make reports leading to recom-
mendations and personnel actions. They assign
pilots and attend supervisors' meetings at the main
base at Lafayette, Louisiana. They exercise inde-
pendent judgment in directing the personnel under
them. We find merit to the contention of the Peti-
tioner that they are supervisors within the meaning
of the Act, and we exclude them from the unit.
61
In view of the foregoing, we find the following
unit of employees to be appropriate for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining within the meaning of
Section 9(b) of the Act:
All pilots and mechanic-pilots of the Employer
whether based in the United States or foreign
countries, including test pilots and pilot
trainers, and special assignments pilots, but ex-
cluding lead pilots, mechanics, radio traffic
control operators, operations employees, office
and plant clerical employees, flight safety of-
ficers, foreign service coordinators, guards,
and all other supervisors as defined in the Act.
[Direction of Election2 omitted from publica-
tion.]
S In order to assure that all eligible voters may have the opportunity to be
informed of the issues in the exercise of their statutory right to vote, all
parties to the election should have access to a list of voters and their ad-
dresses which may be used to communicate with them Excelsior Un-
derwear Inc , 156 NLRB 1236, N L R B v Wyman-Gordon Co, 394 U S
759 Accordingly, it is hereby directed that an election eligibility list, con-
taining the names and addresses of all the eligible voters, must be filed by
the Employer with the Regional Director for Region 15 within 7 days of the
date of this Decision and Direction of Election The Regional Director shall
make the list available to all parties to the election No extension of time to
file this list shall be granted by the Regional Director except in extraordina-
ry circumstances Failure to comply with this requirement shall be grounds
for setting aside the election whenever proper objections are filed