Sprecher Drilling Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 15, 1962

139 N.L.R.B. 1009 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

SPRECHER DRILLING CORPORATION 1009
In view of the foregoing, we find that the Intervenors' contract
constitutes a bar to an election of representatives at this time s
[The Board dismissed the petition.]
G The contract has a termination date of June 20, 1963 Under the Board ' s current
contract-bar rules , petitions filed on or after May 1, 1962, will be held timely if filed not
earlier than 90 days , and not later than 60 days , prior to the termination date See
Leonard Wholesale Meats, Inc., 136 NLRB 1000.
Sprecher Drilling Corporation 1 and Millwrights and Machinery
Erectors, Local Union No. 2834, AFL- CIO, Petitioner. Case
No. 27-IBC-2278. November 15, 1962
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 F. T. Frisbey, 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 Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Members Leedom, Fanning, and Brown].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain
employees of the Employer.
3. The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of all drillers, motor
men, derrick men, and floor men employed by the Employer in the
State of Wyoming. The Employer is a Wyoming corporation engaged
in the business of drilling oil wells for oil companies. With head-
quarters in Casper, Wyoming, it operates in an area covering six
The name of the Employer appears as corrected at the hearing
2 The hearing officer referred to the Board the Employer 's motion to dismiss the petition
on the following grounds: (1) The Employer ' s name was incorrectly stated on the peti-
tion ; ( 2) the petition does not comply with the Board 's Rules and Regulations because it
is not sworn before a notary public or other authorized person, and does not contain a
declaration by the person signing it under the penalties of the criminal code that its con-
tents are true and correct to the best of his belief , ( 3) the Petitioner has not demon-
strated a 30-percent showing of interest , and (4 ) there is not sufficient continuity and
stability of employment to justify the finding of an appropriate unit As to ( 1) the error
in the Employer ' s name was of a minor nature and was corrected at the hearing As
to (2) the record shows that the petition did contain the necessary declaration that the
contents were true and correct to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person sign-
ing it and that said petition was signed As to (3) the sufficiency of the Petitioner 's show-
ing of interest is an administrative natter not subject to litigation . 0. D Jennings &
Company, 68 NLRB 516 We are administratively satisfied that Petitioner ' s showing of
interest is adequate Finally as to (4) we are finding , for reasons hereinafter set forth,
an appropriate unit In view of the foregoing we find the Employer ' s contentions to be
without merit . Accordingly , its motion to dismiss the petition is herewith denied
139 NLRB No. 79.
1010 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
States.' Most of its drilling is exploratory rather than developing
existing oil basins so that its business is of a transitory nature. After
completing a particular project it is not uncommon for a drilling rig
to be moved to another area 50 or more miles away. Each project
may involve more than one drilling rig and may last for several
months. In its operations, the Employer employs a permanent nucleus
of operating employees who travel With the rigs from area to area.4
However, when starting a particular project, the Employer will hire
most of its drilling crews from the local area, giving preference to
former employees. Although employees thus hired have the option
of remaining on the payroll and following the rig, most of them
choose not to do so. Nevertheless, the record shows that the Employer
has a number of people now working or in layoff status who have
worked for the Employer with more or less frequency for several
years, and it is estimated that approximately 65 percent of its em-
ployees have during the past year Worked a minimum of 10 or more
days for the Employer. In view of the fact that the Employer's op-
erations are carried on within a fairly well-defined geographical area
and fixed labor market and the fact that a substantial number of em-
ployees are employed on a regular and part-time basis, We believe that
notwithstanding the transitory nature of the employer's operations,
these operations have a sufficient element of stability to them to enable
the Board to define a unit appropriate for collective-bargaining pur-
poses. We find therefore, that a question affecting commerce exists
concerning the representation of certain employees of the Employer
within Section 9(c) (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.'
4. As indicated, the Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of all drillers,
motor men, derrick men, and floor men employed by the Employer
within the State of Wyoming. The Employer takes no position as
to the appropriateness of the unit requested. As also indicated, the
Employer employs a permanent nucleus of drilling crews which move
with the Employer's drilling rigs from area to area and that the skills
utilized by the various classifications of employees are similar on all
rigs. In addition, it appears that the Employer's operations are cen-
trally managed, and it further appears that there is no identifiable
group of regular employees whose Work is confined to the State of
l\Tyoming. In view of the centralized control of management, the
similarity of skills, functions, and Working conditions, the maintenance
of a permanent nucleus of employees who work in many areas, and the
8 These Include the States of Wyoming , Montana, and Utah, and three other States not
otherwise identified in the record
4 The record indicates that employees within the nucleus have remained with the Em-
ployer for several years and in some cases for as long as 10 years
5 Daniel Construction Company , Inc., 133 NLRB 264
SPRECHER DRILLING CORPORATION 1011
absence of any identifiable regular group working wholly in Wyoming,
we find that only a unit coextensive with all the Employer's opera-
tions is appropriate.
The Employer contends that drillers are supervisors and should be
excluded from any unit found appropriate. The Petitioner would in-
clude drillers in the unit. The record shows that each drilling crew
works under the immediate direction of a driller. Drilling operations
are conducted on an around-the-clock basis. When a drilling opera-
tion is about to start, the tool pusher, who is in charge of the entire
drilling operation, will hire the necessary number of drillers. Be-
cause of the driller's familiarity with the local labor market, drillers
are given full authority to hire other crew members; and they also have
the authority to discharge any of these employees. Although drill-
ers may on occasion work in nonsupervisory capacities when sufficient
driller jobs are not available, we find, nevertheless, in view of the
clear authority to hire and discharge other employees and the fact that
they also responsibly direct the work of other employees, that drillers
are supervisors within the meaning of the Act. Accordingly, we
shall exclude drillers from the unit found appropriate herein.
We find that the following employees of the Employer constitute
a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within
the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act: All motor men, derrick men,
and floor men employed by the Employer in drilling operations, ex-
cluding all office clericals, professional employees, guards, drillers,
and all other supervisors as defined in the Act.'
5. Although the question of eligibility was at issue, neither party
has taken any position with respect to it. While the record is not
too specific on the point, it appears that the minimum time consumed
in drilling a well is approximately 10 days and that a majority of the
employees hired at the drilling site work 10 or more days a year for the
Employer.' In these circumstances we believe that only those em-
ployees who have worked 10 or more days during the year preceding
the eligibility date recorded in this Direction of Election have a sub-
stantial and continuing interest in conditions of employment with this
Employer, and that the selection of this figure will insure a representa-
tive vote. We therefore find that in addition to those in the unit who
6 Although the Petitioner requested a unit of only employees working in the State of
Wyoming, we are administratively advised that it has a sufficient showing of interest in
the larger unit herein found appropriate. However , if the Petitioner does not desire to
participate in the election herein directed , it may withdraw upon proper notice to the
Regional Director within 10 days from the date of 1 he Direction of Election.
7 Testimony of the Employer shows that employees with lesser periods of employment
than 10 days a year are usually those who for one reason or another are found unqualified
for the job, leave the job before its completion , or apply for work near the completion of
the job.
672-010-63-vol 13 9-6 5
1012 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
were employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the
date of the Decision and Direction of Election, employees who have
worked 10 or more days during the year preceding the eligibility date
for the election herein directed are eligible to vote.
[Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.]
Trade Winds Drilling Company and Millwrights and Machinery
Erectors, Local Union No. 2834, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case
No. 27-RC-2279. November 15, 1962
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 F. T. Frisbey, hearing officer.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju-
dicial error and are hereby affirmed.'
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act, the Board has
delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-member
panel [Members Leedom, Fanning, and Brown].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent certain em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. The facts in the record before us are substantially the same as
the facts before us in the recently decided case of Sprecher Drilling
Corporation 2 The record here, as in Sprecher, indicates that the Em-
ployer is engaged in the business of exploratory oil drilling in approxi-
mately the same geographical area of Western States. It employs a
small nucleus of regular employees, who travel with the rigs from one
1 The hearing officer referred to the Board the Employer's motion to dismiss the peti-
tion on the following grounds: ( 1) The petition does not comply with the Board's Rules
and Regulations because it is not sworn before a notary public or other authorized person,
and does not contain a declaration by the pemon signing it under the penalties of the
criminal code that its contents are true and correct to the best of his belief; (2) the
Petitioner has not demonstrated a 30-percent showing of interest ; and (3 ) there is not
sufficient continuity and stability of employment to justify the finding of an appropriate
unit. As to ( 1), the record shows that the petition did contain the necessary declaration
that the contents were true and correct to the best of the knowledge and belief of the
person signing it and that said petition was signed . As to (2) the sufficiency of the
Petitioner's showing of interest is an administrative matter not subject to litigation:
0. D. Jenn%ngs & Company, 68 NLRB 516 . We are administratively satisfied that Peti-
tioner' s showing of interest is adequate . Finally, as to (3), we are finding for reasons
hereinafter set forth , an appropriate unit. In view of the foregoing we find the Employer's
contentions to be without merit . Accordingly , its motion to dismiss the petition is here-
with denied.
2 139 NLRB 1009.
139 NLRB No. 80.