Phillips Petroleum Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 7, 1950

88 N.L.R.B. 925 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter Of PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY, EMPLOYER and OIL
WORKERS INTERNATIONAL UNION, C. I. 0., PETITIONER
Case No. 17-RC-619.-Decided March 71 1950
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before Charles F.
McCoy, 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 [Members Houston, Reynolds, 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 organizations involved claim to represent certain
employees 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 Petitioner seeks to combine in a single unit all the mainte-
nance and operating employees of the production department in the
Employer's two Kansas districts, known respectively as the Eastern
Kansas District, herein called the Eastern District, and the Western
Kansas District, herein called the Western district. The Employer
and the Intervenor,' on the other hand, contend that the production
department employees in each of the two Kansas districts constitute
separate appropriate units. There is also disagreement as to the unit
placement of gang pushers and unit operators. The Petitioner urges
the inclusion of both these categories, the Employer, their exclusion,
while the Intervenor would include the unit operators and exclude
the gang pushers.
I Eastern Kansas District Guild, Inc., Independent.
88 NLRB No. 183.
925
926 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Employer is engaged in producing, transporting, refining,
and marketing petroleum products in various areas in the United
States. Its main offices are in Bartlesville, Oklahoma. The Employ-
er's production department conducts its operations in six geographical
.divisions, one of which comprises most of the States of Kansas and
Nebraska and is known as the Northern Division. The Northern Divi-
sion maintains two districts in the State of Kansas. These are the
two districts with which this proceeding is concerned. The record
does not show a history of collective bargaining in either of these dis-
tricts.2
The Western District extends over a considerably larger geographi-
cal area than does the Eastern District, the former embracing 17
counties and the latter, only 5. The districts are not contiguous, being
about 50 miles apart at their nearest points. The offices of the 2
districts, however, are 170 miles apart. The offices of the Western
District are located in Great Bend, Kansas, and the offices of the East-
ern District are located in Eureka, Kansas. In charge of the opera-
tions in each district is a district superintendent who is answerable to
the superintendent of the Northern Division. Under each district
superintendent are numerous supervisors, including foremen and sub-
foremen. Each district does its own purchasing of supplies, hiring
of employees, and record keeping, including the preparation of pay-
rolls. There are 68 employees attached to the Western District and
80 employees to the Eastern District. While the job classifications
and working conditions are substantially the same in both districts,
personnel is not interchanged. Furthermore, transfers of employees
from one district to the other are relatively infrequent.
The districts have separate producing facilities and carry on their
respective operations independent of each other. There are 368 oil
wells on 139 leases in the Western District and 650 oil wells on 54
leases in the Eastern District. In the Western District, oil is carried
to the well bore by natural forces and it is then pumped to the surface.
This method of extracting oil is referred to as "direct" or "primary
operations." In the Eastern District, the extraction of oil is accom-
plished by "secondary recovery operations" or "waterflood." Under
this method, water is forced into the oil-bearing strata through spe-
cially drilled "input" wells or through converted nonproductive wells
2 It appears that sometime either in 1937 or 1938 , the Employer invited the employees in
its Kansas districts , of which there were three at that time , to appoint delegates to repre-
sent them in negotiating a contract with the Employer. At their first meeting, the delegates
and the Employer entered into a contract . Very shortly thereafter , the contract was ter-
minated by agreement of the parties because, according to one of the delegates, it was
negotiated in a manner "outlawed by the courts ." The Petitioner 's contention that this
evidence establishes a history of bargaining in the Kansas districts is clearly without merit
and is hereby rejected.
PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY 927
in order to drive the oil to the wells from where it is subsequently
pumped to the surface . The record shows that employees experienced
in "direct" or "primary operations ," as are the employees in the West -
ern District , are unable to undertake assignments in oil fields employ-
ing "secondary recovery operations" without additional training.
The wells in the Western District require the use of heavier type equip-
ment than do those in the Eastern District because of their greater
depth and a corrosion problem peculiar to that area.
In view of the foregoing , including the geographic separation of
the two districts, their independent operations , their separate super-
visory hierarchy , and the entire record in the case, we are persuaded
that the employees in each of the Employer 's two Kansas districts
constitute separate appropriate units.3
There remains for consideration the question of whether unit oper-
ators and gang pushers should be included . It is the contention of the
Employer that these men are supervisors and therefore should be
excluded.
Unit operators: These men are responsible for the repair of sub-
surface equipment in wells. They are answerable to the subforemen
from whom they receive their instructions and orders . Assisting
each unit operator in the performance of his duties , is a crew of two or
three well service roustabouts whose work he supervises , directs, and
also assigns to them. The unit operators receive a higher rate of pay
than do the roustabouts and work longer hours. They prepare vari-
ous reports and keep their own time records as well as those of the
men in their crews. They have authority to order the roustabouts to
work overtime and can discharge them for serious infraction of rules
on the job. They may make recommendations concerning promotion,
transfers , and discipline of the men under them and their recommenda-
tions are given weight by management . We find that the unit opera-
tors are supervisors within the meaning of . the Act and shall exclude
them.
Gang pushers : There are five gang pushers in the Western District
and none in the Eastern District. These men are responsible for the
repair and maintenance of surface equipment . Like the unit oper-
ators, they are in charge of small crews of roustabouts and their au-
thority with respect to their crews is the same as that of the unit
operators . Accordingly, we find that gang pushers are supervisors
within the meaning of the Act and shall exclude them.
We find that each of the following groups of employees in the Em-
ployer's production department , excluding from each group all
clerical , administrative , technical , and professional employees, engi-
B Standard Oil Company of Texas, 88 NLRB 224; Felmont Corporation, 69 NLRB 868.
928
0
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
neers, oil treaters, janitors, chief clerks, gang pushers, unit operators,
foremen, subforemen, and all other supervisors as defined by the Act,
constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
1. All maintenance and operating employees in the Eastern Kansas
District.
2. All maintenance and operating employees in the Western Kansas
District.
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur-
poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, elections by secret
ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days
from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of
the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard, and
subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Relations
Board Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the units found
appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed dur-
ing the payroll period immediately preceding the date of this Direc-
tion of Elections, including employees who did not work during said
payroll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily
laid off, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been
discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior'to
the date of the elections, and also exchiding employees on strike who
are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine :
(1) Whether the employees in unit 1 desire to be represented, for
collective bargaining purposes by Oil Workers International Union,
C. I. 0., or by Eastern Kansas District Guild, Inc., Independent, or by,
neither;
(2) Whether or not the employees in unit 2 desire to be represented,
for collective bargaining purposes by Oil Workers International
Union, C. I. 0,4
We have not ordered the name of the Eastern Kansas District Guild, Inc., Independent,
to be placed on the ballot of the employees in the Western District because it made no show-
ing of interest among these employees.