Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines et al

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 12, 1940

26 N.L.R.B. 538 (N.L.R.B. 1940)

In the Matter Of PENNSYLVANIA GREYHOUND LINES et al (ATLANTIC
GREYHOUND CORPORATION ) and THE BROTHERHOOD OF RAILROAD
TRAINMEN I ,
Case No. R-151 it,
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION,
AND
DIRECTION AND ORDER'
August 1.2, 1940
On January 25, 1940, the National Labor Relations Board, herein
called the Board, issued a Supplemental Direction of Elections in the
above-entitled proceeding 1 which, nunc pro tunc as of January 19,
1940, directed that separate elections by secret ballot be conducted
among employees of Atlantic' Greyhouiid Corporation, Charleston,
West Virginia, herein called the Company, within the groups
described below:
(a) Bus drivers, and temporary dispatchers who hold seniority
rights as bus drivers, to determine, whether they desire to -be
represented by the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen or the
Interstate Motor Transportation Employees Union, Inc., for.the
purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither; ,
(b) Maintenance employees, to determine whether, they ' desire
to be represented by International Association of Machinists or
by Interstate Motor Transportation Employees Union, Inc.,
for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by neither; •
(c) All other employees, except supervisory employees, to de-
termine whether or not they desire to be represented by the
Interstate Motor Transportation, Employees Union, Inc.,,for the
purposes of collective bargaining. ,
Pursuant to the Supplemental Direction of Election, elections' by
secret ballot were conducted during the period from Feb`ruary' 21,'
1940, to February 29, 1940, under the direction and supervision of'
the Regional Director for the Ninth'Region (Cincinnati, 'Ohio)*.- On'
May 21, 1940, the Regional Director, acting pursuant' to Article III','
1 19 N. L R B 694. See also order revoking prior Supplemental Direction of Elections , 19 N L R B.
693, Supplemental Direction of Elections , 19 N L R B 692, and Decision , Order, and Second Direction
of Elections , 11 N. L. R B 738 ,
26 N. L. R. B., No. 53.
538
PENNSYLVANIA GREYHOUND LINES 539
'Section .9, of National Labor Relations.Board Rules and Regula-
tions-Series 2, as amended, issued and duly served upon the parties
an Election,Report, setting forth the results of the elections.
As to the results of the balloting, the Regional Director reported as
follows:
'GROUP A• ELECTION
'Numbei'of alleged eligible voters-- -------------------- 411
Number'of ballots placed in ballot box------------------- 345
Number of unchallenged ballots for Interstate Motor'Trans-
portation• Employees Union, Inc------------------------ 68
Number of unchallenged ballots for The Brotherhood of
Railroad Trainmen---------------------------------- 103
)!`t' Number of unchallenged ballots for neither--------------- 174
Number-of challenged ballots--------------------------- 0
Number of blank ballots-------------------------------- 0
k Number of spoiled ballots------------------------------ • 0
GROUP B ELECTION
Number of alleged eligible voters------------------------ 208
Number of ballots placed in ballot box------------------- 180
Ntimber of unchallenged ballots for Interstate Motor Trans-
portation Employees Union, Inc----------------------- 48
f., Number of unchallenged ballots for International Associa-
tion of Machinists, A. F. L--------------------------- 46.
Number of unchallenged ballots for neither--------------- 32
Number of challenged ballots ----__------------------ 54
Number of blank ballots-------------------------------- 0
Number of spoiled ballots -----------------------'---- - - - --------- 0
GROUP C ELECTION
Number of alleged eligible voters------------------------ 345
Number of ballots placed in ballot box------------------- 221
Number of unchallenged ballots for' Interstate Motor Trans-
portation Employees Union; Inc----------------------- 88
Number of unchallenged ballots against 'Interstate Motor
Transportation Employees Union, Inc------------------ 131
Number of challenged ballots--------------------------- 1
Number of blank ballots-------------------------------- 1
Number of spoiled`ballots------------------------------ 0
As 'to' the ' Group A Election, the Regional Director also reported
that, after the balloting but prior to the counting of the ballots on
March 1, 1940, both labor organizations stated that they had no
objections to offer, with respect to, the conduct of the election, but
that on March 15,.1940, the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen,
herein called the Brotherhood, filed unfair labor practice charges with
the Regional Director alleging that,the Company had interfered with
the freedom of choice of its employees in the election. The Regional
Director further reported, that as of the date of his Report, no evidence
540 DECISIONS' OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of a substantial nature had been filed in support of said charges, and
recommended that the Group A petitions be dismissed.
On May 31, 1940, the Brotherhood duly filed objections to the
Election Report, alleging certain specific acts of interference on the
part of the Company with its employees' freedom of choice, alleging
that Board agents conducting the election had declared illegal the
use of sample-marked ballots by the Brotherhood, and requesting
that the Election Report be set aside, and that this proceeding be
consolidated with the charges of unfair labor practices pending for
investigation. The Brotherhood further requested leave to present
oral argument before the Board.
On July 10, 1940, the Regional Director issued a Report on Objec-
tions, copies of which were duly served on the parties, in which he
reported that as of that date no additional evidence had been offered
in support of the charges alleging unfair labor practices by the Com-
pany, and further reported that his investigation revealed that Board
agents had not declared illegal the use of sample ballots but had
refused to give the Brotherhood representatives advice as to, election
strategy; and that in his opinion the objections of the Brotherhood
were without merit. The Board has considered the Election Report,
the objections, and the Report on Objections to the Election Report,
and finds that the objections relating to the Election Report do not
raise any substantial or material issues. Accordingly, we hereby
sustain the rulings, findings, and recommendations of the Regional
Director in his Election Report and in his Report on Objections and
deny the request of the Brotherhood for oral argument.
As to the Group B Election, the Regional Director reported that the
International Association of Machinists, herein called the I. A. M.,
objected to the conduct of the balloting on the ground that supervisory
employees and other employees entitled to participate in voting were
permitted to act as watchers at the polls. The Regional Director
reported that no employees of supervisory authority over employees
eligible to vote in the Group B Election served as observers, that no
employees in the B group acted as observers for the Company, and
that none of the Company observers conducted himself improperly.
The Regional Director also reported that the I. A. M. had agreed to
the presence of two Company observers at the polls, that every
employee in the Company's employ, except supervisors, was eligible
to'vote in one of the three simultaneously conducted elections, and
that the I. A. M. was aware of these facts when it agreed to the
presence of Company observers at the polls.
On June 1, 1940, the'I. A. M. duly filed its Objections to the Election
Report, in which it alleged that it received insufficient notice of the
individuals selected by the Company to act as observers, objected
"to the policy of the Board to allow representatives designated by the
PENNSYLVANIA GREYHOUND LINES 541
Company, to be present , as observers or watchers during Board con-
ducted elections ," and restated its objection to the conduct of the
balloting , as set forth above . The Regional Director in his Report on
Objections indicated that any delay in notification to the I. A. M. of
the names of individuals designated by the Company as observers did
not prejudice the I . A. M., since its objections were addressed to the
class of observers selected ,rather than to specific individuals . We find,
no substantial merit in the contention of the I. A. M. that the presence
of Company observers at the polls is prejudicial to the interests of the
labor organizations involved, and that the Board should change its
policy in this regard. The Board has considered the Election Report,
the Objections , and the Report on Objections to the Election Report
and finds that the objections of the I. A. M. relating to the conduct
of the balloting do not raise any substantial or material issues.
Accordingly , we hereby sustain the rulings, findings , and recommen-
dations of the Regional Director in his Election Report and in his
Report on Objections.
The I . A. M. challenged the eligibility of 42 voters on the ground
that they were , not properly included within the definition of "mainte-
nance employees," as set forth in the Second Direction of Elections,
and asserted that this , definition properly included only mechanics„
and repairmen, and excluded washers, greasers , and other garage,
employees, among whom the 42 challenged voters are numbered.
The Regional Director in his Election Report stated as his opinion
that the Board's Decision and Direction of Election contemplate:
the' inclusion of such employees within the definition of the term
"maintenance employees" and recommended that the ballots so
challenged by the I. A. M. be counted as valid in the election. The
record of the original hearing in this matter, and statements of the
I. A. M. representative testifying ' therein, indicate not only that
washers, oilers , greasers , ' and other garage employees were contem-
plated by the, Board to be included within the term "maintenance
employee 's," but also that the , I. A. M. at the hearing sought their
inclusion . -* Accordingly , we hereby sustain the rulings, findings, and
recommendations of the Regional Director in his Election Report and
shall direct that the '42 ballots challenged, for the reasons set forth
above, be counted by the Regional Director.
The I . A. 'M. also challenged,,the ballots of C ' R . Byerly, Ralph
Ebert, H. L. Hastings, William Johnson, J . L. Swain, and L. G.
Williams on the ground that they are foremen and consequently
ineligible to vote in the Group B Election . The Regional , Director
in his Election Report stated that these employees are foremen, and
paid on a salary basis as, distinguished from "maintenance employees"
who are paid'by the hour, and that they possess the authority to recom-
542 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL ' LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
mend 'disciplinary action 'against employees under' their 'supervision.'
We shall direct that the ballots of these employees not'be'counted.' `
The T. A. M. also challenged the ballots of E: `J. Ebert, Earlie
Williams, J. M. Rierson, M.' M: Beroth, A. D. Morgan; and F. S.
Smith, as supervisory employees, and Charles'A. Arthur as an assi'stant'
dispatcher, and consequently ineligible to vote in the Group B Elec=
tion. We shall direct that the Regional Director not count the'ballots
of E. J: Ebert, Earlie Williams, and `J.'M. Rierson who were super-''``
visory employees. We shall direct' that the Regional Director'count
the ballots of M. M. Beroth and A.' D. Morgan who 'act as fo'r'emen
only -in the absence of regular foremen at infrequent periods and who
otherwise perform maintenance duties. We shall also' direct that the
Regional Director count the ballots of F. S. Smith, whose name was
omitted from the eligibility list because of error, and who was'employed''
as' a painter, and Charles A. Arthur, whose chief duties are those of a'
maintenance employee and who acts as a dispatcher only "on such
occasions when the regular dispatcher is absent from duty.
'As to the Group C; Election, the Regional Director in his-Election
Report recommended that the petition of Interstate Motor Transporta-
tion Employees Union, Inc., be dismissed. No objections' of any
nature were raised with refeience to the 'conduct or'i'esults of'the'
Group C Election. ' "
DIRECTION AND ORDER
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National
Labor Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Rela-
tions Act, 49 Stat. 449, and pursuant to Article III, Sections 8 and
9, of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series
2, as amended,'it is hereby
'DIRECTED THAT, as a part of the investigation directed by the'
Board to ascertain representatives for the purposes of collective bar-
gaining with Atlantic Greyhound Corporation, Charleston, West'
Virginia, the Regional Director for the Ninth Region, Cincinnati,`
Ohio, shall, pursuant to the Rules and Regulations of the Board set
forth above, and subject to Article III, Section 9, of said R'ules,'within7
ten (10) days from the date of this' Direction, open and count the
ballots of M. M. Beroth, A. D. Morgan, and F. S. Smith, whose votes
were challenged because they wei e allegedly" supervisory employees,. .
and Charles A. Arthur, whose vote was challenged because he was, {
allegedly an assistant dispatcher,' and shall open and count the ballots
of the 42 employees in the Group B'Ele'ction whose votes were chal-
lenged on the ground that their functions are not included" within the
term "maintenance employees," and shall thereafter prepare and
cause to be served upon the parties in this case a Supplemental Elec
PENNSYLVANIA GREYHOUND LINES 543
tion Report embodying his findings thereon and his recommendations
as to the results of the secret ballots, and it is further
DIRECTED THAT, the Regional Director shall not open or count the
ballots of C. R. Byerly, Ralph Ebert, H. L. Hastings, William Johnson,
J. L. Swain, L., G. Williams, E. J. Ebert, Earlie Williams, and J. M.
Rierson
IT, IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petitions herein for Investigation
and `Certification of Representatives of'Atlantic Greyhound Corpora-
tion, Charleston, West Virginia, insofar as they pertain to the Group
A Election, be and they hereby are dismissed.
IT IS HEREBY'ORDERED that the petition' herein for Investigation
and Certification of Representatives of employees of Atlantic Grey-
hound Corporation, Charleston, West Virginia, insofar as it pertains
to the Group C Election, be and it hereby is dismissed.
.MR.'WILLIAM:M.:LEISERSON took no part in the consideration of
the above Supplemental Decision and Direction and Order.