Denver, Salt Lake and Pacific Stages, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsSep 5, 1972

198 N.L.R.B. 1181 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

TEMPLE SQUARE BUS CENTER Denver, Salt Lake and Pacific Stages, Inc.; Denver, Colorado Springs & Pueblo Motorways, Inc., Northern Division ; Rocky Mountain Lines Divi- sion of Continental Bus Systems , Inc., Rocky Mountain Lines Division , d/b/a Temple Square Bus Center and Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1468, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case 27-AC-23 September 5, 1972 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND KENNEDY Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing was held before Hearing Officer J. Donald Meyer. All parties appeared at the hearing and were given full opportunity to participate therein. On June 19, 1972, the Regional Director for Region 27 issued an order transferring the case to the National Labor Relations Board. The Employers and the Petitioner thereafter filed briefs with the Board. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding 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 affirmed. Upon the entire record, the Board finds: 1. The Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purposes of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein. 2. The Petitioner, by means of a petition for amendment of certification, seeks to combine into one bargaining unit four of its separate units existing at each Employer where it was previously certified.' The Employer seeks dismissal of the petition, contending, inter alia, that the unit sought by the Petitioner is inappropriate. The thrust of the Petitioner's argument is that it The units represented by the Petitioner are as follows Denver, Salt Lake and Pacific Stages , Inc The Petitioner was certified by the Board as the representative of the bus operators in 1952; the last contract the Petitioner had with the Employer expired on January 31, 1972. Denver, Colorado Springs & Pueblo Motorways, Inc The Petitioner was certified by the Board as the representative of bus operators and maintenance and terminal employees in 1962, the last contract the Petitioner had with the Employer expired on December 16, 1971 Rocky Mountain Lines Division of Continental Bus Systems , Inc The Petitioner was certified by the Board as the representative of the bus operators in 1953, the last contract the Petitioner had with the Employer expired on January 16, 1972 Temple Square Bus Center The Petitioner was certified by the Board as the representative of the terminal employees, ticket clerks, information clerks, express clerks, porters, and baggage handlers in 1955, the current contract the Petitioner has with the Employer will expire on May 31, 1973 1181 should be allowed to represent the employees of the four Employers in one combined unit, despite prior certifications in separate units, because of the unified management of the four Employers.2 From their inception, the four units have been involved in separate negotiations for each unit, resulting in four separate contracts. The members of each unit have separate rates of pay, separate hours, separate employment benefits, and separate seniority lists. The employees of the units involved in this case are subject to separate immediate supervision. With respect to time off and the handling of grievances, the employees of the three bus companies contact their own Employer's dispatchers about such mat- ters. There is virtually no interchange of employees among the various Employers.3 Operating equipment is held separately by each Employer; personnel files are separately maintained by each Employer; each Employer files separate reports to state and federal authorities; and the Employers do not combine their revenues. On the basis of the foregoing considerations, we are of the opinion that the record affords a wholly insufficient basis for finding that the combined unit sought by the Petitioner would be an appropriate one. Accordingly, we shall dismiss the petition.4 ORDER It is hereby ordered that the petition herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed. CHAIRMAN MILLER, concurring: While the majority opinion appears to treat as separate employers companies which I believe constitute subsidiary components of a single employ- er,5 I agree nonetheless that the unit sought is inappropriate, as it would consist of a heterogeneous grouping of employees who have no interests in 2 Ralph Berndt is the general manager of each of the Employers, and serves as a member of the collective-bargaining committee for each of the Employers during its negotiations with the Petitioner 3 The Petitioner presented evidence of interchange of employees between the various Employers only with respect to the consolidated extra board which functions as a pool of drivers from six carriers who do not have sufficient seniority to bid on regular established routes; these employees may work for any one of the various Employers , but receive no more benefits than those provided by their Employer and are paid only by that Employer 4 Member Jenkins concurs in the result . The other issues raised by the Employers need not be reached in view of our disposition of this case. 5 See Transcontinental Bus System, Inc, 178 NLRB 712 As reflected in that decision, Denver, Salt Lake and Pacific Stages, Inc , Denver , Colorado Springs & Pueblo Motorways, Inc, Northern Division , and Rocky Mountain Lines Division of Continental Bus Systems , Inc, are but three of the numerous divisions and subsidiaries of the parent nationwide transpor- tation system 198 NLRB No. 175 1182 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD common which are not shared by other employees a matter to be decided on a consensual basis by the excluded from such unit.6 More importantly, howev- parties to the bargaining relationship. No consensual er, as I stated in my concurring opinions in the recent basis for merger exists here. Libbey-Owens-Ford cases,7 the merger of existing Accordingly, I concur in the dismissal of this appropriate single-plant units into multiplant units is petition. 6 Cf my dissenting opinion in Central Power & Light Company, 195 7 Libbey-Owens-Ford Company, 189 NLRB No. 138, and 189 NLRB No. NLRB No 139 139.