Harmony Short Line Motor Transportation Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board DecisionsJul 22, 1942

42 N.L.R.B. 757 (N.L.R.B. 1942)

In the Mattel Of HARMONY SHORT LINE MOTOR TRANSPORTATION COM- PANY and DIVISION No J 1067 OF THE AMALGAMATED AssocIATION'OF STREET, ELECTRIC RAILWAY AND MOTOR COACH EMPLOYEES OF AMERICA Case No R-3984 -Decided July 22, 1942 Jurisdiction bus tianspoitation industry Investigation and Certification of Representatives : existence of question dis- pute as to appropriateness of unit, election necessary Unit Appropriate for Collective Bargaining : dispatchers and ticket agents, found to be supervisory employees, held to constitute an appropriate unit Mr S Harold Grossman, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Union. Mr. David I. McCahill, Sr, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for the Company Miss Marcia Hertzmark, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION STATEMENT OF THE CASE Upon petition duly filed by Division No 1067 of the Amalgamated Association of Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of America, herein called the Union, alleging that a question affecting commerce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of Harmony Short Line Motor Transportation Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, herein called the Company, the National Labor Rela- tions Board, provided for an appropriate hearing upon due notice before T. Lowry Whittaker, Trial Examiner Said hearing was held at Pitts- burgh, Pennsylvania, on June 24, 1942 The Company and the Union appeared, participated, and were affoided full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing on the issues The Trial Examiner's iuhngs made at the heat- ing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed The Com- pany and the Union filed briefs which the Board has considered 42 N L R B, No 147 757 758 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABO+ R' RELATIONS BOARD Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following: FINDINGS OF FACT I THE BUSINESS OF THE COMPANY Harmony Short Line Motor Transportation Company is a Penn- sylvania corporation with its principal office in Pittsburgh, Pennsyl- vania It is engaged in carrying for hire passengers and freight within Pennsylvania, is registered with the Interstate Commerce Commission as a common carrier, and is authorized to do business in Pennsylvania and other States of the United States Until recently, it operated a chartered bus service to any point in the United States. In Pittsburgh, the Company maintains a ticket office and terminal but also uses the Greyhound Bus Terminal. In other towns along its lines, it shares with other bus companies the ticket offices and terminals in which it receives and- discharges passengers Some 'of the passenger travel on its lines is interstate, being from point of origin to connecting carrier, carrier to carrier, and from carrier to destination. Materials and supplies used by the Company include busses, trucks, tires, grease, oil, gasoline, and other equipment During the year end- ing June 1, 1942, the approximate total value of these materials pur- chased amounted to $232,000, of which about 98 percent represented the cost of materials purchased outside the State of Pennsylvania During the same period the total receipts for passenger service were approximately $540,000, of which about 10 percent represented re- ceipts from movements in interstate commerce For the year ending May 1, 1942, the Company received approximately $70,000 from its chartered bus seivice Approximately 25 percent of this amount was derived from interstate ti avel ' The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act , H. THE ORGANIZATION INVOLVED Division No 1067 of the Amalgamated Association of Street, Elec- tric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of America is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, ad- mitting to membership employees of the Company. III THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION i The Union has represented the Company's bus operators since 1936 In 1941 it began to admit ticket agents and dispatchers employed by the Company, and in October 1941 it submitted to the Company a pro- HARMONY SHORT -LINE MOTOR TRANSPORTATION co 759 posed supplemental contract to cover these employees.' The Company refused to bargain on behalf of the ticket agents and dispatchers, con- tending that they did not constitute an appropriate unit I A statement of the Regional Director, introduced in evidence at the hearing, and a pay-roll check made at the hearing by the Trial Ex- aminer , show that the Union represents a substantial number of em- ployees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate 2 We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning the representation of employees of the Company, within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act IV. THE APPROPRIATE UNIT The Union seeks a unit composed of ticket agents and dispatchers employed by the Company. The Company contends that this unit is inappropriate because these employees perform supervisory duties. It also claims that the practical effect of declaring appropriate a unit of dispatchers and ticket agents will be to include them in the unit with the bus drivers, and that such unit would be inappropriate. Dispatchers, of whom there are about five, assign coaches to the bus drivers, select men for extra work within the regulations pertaining thereto which appear in the Union's contract covering bus drivers, report infractions of i ules, see that buses are on time and that there are a sufficient number of them, have authority to discipline, suspend and hire bus drivers, and may recommend their discharge 3 They are paid on a monthly salary basis. Ticket agents sell tickets, receive express shipments, and make reports of their activities to the Company. In the Pittsburgh Divi- sion of the Company, the ticket agents act as dispatchers before 9 a. in. and after 6 30 p in , when no dispatcher is on duty In the Allegheny Valley Division, there are some employees who act both as ticket 1 The contract submitted purported to cover "ticket agents, dispatchers and terminal employees " At the hearing, no mention was made of terminal employees , other than ticket agents and dispatchers , and it is assumed that none are involved herein 2 The Regional Director reported that the Union submitted 6 application cards, all bear- ing apparently genuine, original signatures and all bearing names appearing on the Com- pany 's pay roll for March 15, 1942 The Trial Examiner stated that the Union submitted 8 appplication cards, 6 of which bore apparently genuine , original signatures of persons whose names appear on the March 15, 1942, pay roll There are approximately 15 employees in the appropriate unit 3 The general manager of the Company testified that dispatchers have some supervision over ticket agents in that they see that ticket agents treat passengers courteously and dispense correct information with respect to schedules He also testified that he follows the recommendation of the dispatcher in regard to discharging a ticket agent The dis- patcher has no supervisory authority over the ticket agent 's financial transactions, how- ever, and it is clear that only a very minor part of the ticket agent 's duties are subject to superusion by the dispatcher A witness for the Union, who is employed as a ticket agent, testified that dispatchers do not supervise the work of ticket agents 760 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD agents and dispatchers because of the type of travel in that locality, which is predominantly composed of commuters These employees ,are also paid on a salary basis. It thus appears, as contended by the Company, that the dispatchers and the ticket agents, when acting as dispatchers, perform certain supervisoiy duties However, we have held that such employees may form, loin, and be represented by labor organizations for the purposes of collective bargaining with their employer, since, for, the purposes of collective bargaining, they are "employees" within the meaning of Section 2 (3) of the Act 4 The Company further contends, however, that the Union may not represent a unit of bus drivers and also a unit of supervisoiy employees We have recently had occasion to pass upon a similar question in Phelps Dodge Copper Products Corp,5 in which we said neither the production employees, nor the employer, nor the Board can deny the right of the guards as employees to bargain in a unit appropriate for them and to designate any repi esentative they choose for the purpose. We therefore conclude that a unit of dispatchers and ticket agents is appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, and that no reason appears for limiting the choice of such employees to a bargaining agent other than that which represents the bus drivers. The Union wishes to exclude fiom the unit the Company's freight dispatcher The Company desires his inclusion The freight dis- patcher is employed in Pittsburgh, has some contact with ticket agents and bus dispatchers, and has authority over truck drivei s which cor- responds with the authority of bus dispatchers over,bus drivers Since the work of the freight dispatcher is similar to that of the bus dis- patchers, we shall include him in the unit The pai ties disagree as to the inclusion of F W Parker within the unit Although lie is listed on the Company's pay roll as a ticket agent, the Union contends, and the evidence indicates, that he does not per- form the regular duties of a ticket agent Parker is 1 of about 50 "commission" ticket agents employed by the Company, who are not in- volved in this proceeding, and is also on the Company's pay roll as a relief ticket agent In addition, however, he acts as traveling auditor for the Company and assists the general passenger agent in making up schedules It appears that ticket agents consider him as assistant general passenger agent, that he signs letters as such, and is so listed in a motor coach guide We shall exclude him from the unit r 4 See Matter of Union Collieries Coal Company , Oakmont, Pennsylvania and Mane Officials' Union of America (Ind ), 41 N L R B 961, and cases cited therein 5 Phelps Dodge Copper Products Corp and United Electric, Radio & Machine Workers of America, Local No 441 , affiliated with the Congress of Industrial Organizations, 41 N L R B 973 HARMONY SHORT LINE, MOTOR TRANSPORTATION CO. , 761 The Union wishes to include within the unit F Dutkiewwwz whose name appears on the Company's pay roll as a ticket agent The Com- pany claims that Dutkiewicz has not yet become a ticket agent, since he is merely leainmg that work, and that he should presently be classi- fied as a clerks It appeals that part of his time is spent in the Com- pany's office and part of it at the ticket agent's desk, in contemplation of his taking over the duties of ticket agent whenever a vacancy occurs or the need arises We believe his duties are closely related to those of the ticket agents and shall include him within the unit The parties agreed to the exclusion of Donald Phillips, who is also learning to be a ticket agent but whose duties are not yet sufficiently connected thei ewith We shall exclude him We find that all dispatchers and ticket agents of the,Company, in- cluding the freight dispatcher and F Dutkiewicz, but excluding F W. Parker and Donald Phillips, constitute a unit appiopriate for the purposes of collective bargaining, within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act V THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTA'IIVES We find that the question conceinung iepiesentation which has a risen can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot The Company and the Union agreed that a current pay roll should be used to determine those eligible to vote. We shall direct that the employees of the Com- _ pany eligible to vote in the election shall be those in the appi opi sate unit who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of- Election herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the Dii ection DIRECTION OF ELECTION By virtue of and puisuant to the powei vested in the National Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 8, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 2, as amended, it is hereby- DIRECTED that, as gait of the investigation ordered by the Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collectn e bargaining with Harmony Short Line Motor Transportation Company, Pittsbuigh, Pennsylvania, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible but not later than thirty (30) days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and supervision of the Regional Direc- tor for the Sixth Region, acting in this matter as agent for the National 9 Prior to the Company 's statement of its position concerning Dutkiewicz , the general manager testified that Dutkiewicz is called and considered a ticket agent , although he does not receive a ticket agent's salary , 762 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Labor Relations Boaid, and subject to Aiticle III, Section 9, of said Rules and Regulations, among the employees in the unit found ap- propriate in Section IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction, including any such employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or in the active military service or train- ing of the United States, or temporarily laid off, but excluding any who have since quit or been discharged for cause, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by Division No 1067 of the Amal- gamated Association of Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of America for the purposes of collective bargaining. MR GERARD D REILLY took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Direction of Election.