## Facts

- Edgar J. Boudloche worked as a truck driver for Howard Trucking Co., hauling oilfield and marine equipment on a flatbed trailer.
- Roughly half of his runs were between land-based sites; the other half required pickups or deliveries at docks.
- At about 10–20% of the docks, there was no loading equipment or dock labor; at those locations Boudloche loaded and unloaded cargo himself.
- He had pickups or deliveries at such poorly equipped docks about two or three times per week, using a winch or gin pole and boarding barges to secure or release cables.
- Even at well-equipped docks with cranes and dock labor, he was expected to assist with loading and unloading.
- The Benefits Review Board found that only about 2.5–5% of his overall work time involved self-performed dock loading/unloading that required boarding a vessel.
- Boudloche was injured while loading small boats by himself when a boat slipped and crushed his pelvis.
- He sought benefits under the Longshoremen’s and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act (LHWCA).

## Issues

1. Whether an employee satisfies the LHWCA “status” requirement when traditional longshore-type duties in the statutory situs are a regular part of the job but constitute only a small percentage of total work time.

## Decision

- The Fifth Circuit reversed the Benefits Review Board and remanded.
- The court held that regular, non-episodic performance of longshore or maritime cargo-handling duties satisfies LHWCA status even if those duties occupy a small percentage of the employee’s time.
- The court rejected the Board’s approach requiring maritime work to constitute a “substantial portion” of overall employment.

## Legal Principles

- LHWCA “status” is satisfied when at least some portion of an employee’s regular duties involves traditional longshore or harbor work performed on or adjacent to navigable waters.
- Coverage does not depend on a quantitative threshold or the percentage of time spent in maritime work; the key inquiry is whether the maritime duties are regular and recurring rather than isolated or episodic.
- Administrative interpretations imposing a “substantial portion” time requirement conflict with governing precedent favoring functional coverage for workers regularly exposed to maritime cargo-handling risks.
- When an employee’s job includes recurring vessel-related loading or unloading tasks, the employee falls within the class the LHWCA protects, and the claim must be evaluated under that coverage framework on remand.

## Conclusion

Because Boudloche regularly performed vessel-related loading and unloading at docks as part of his job, he met the LHWCA status requirement despite spending only 2.5–5% of his time on those tasks, and the denial of coverage based on an “insubstantial time” test was reversed and remanded.


Boudloche v. Howard Trucking Co., 632 F.2d 1346 (5th Cir. 1980)