Amarillo Bus Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 18, 1948

78 N.L.R.B. 1103 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of M. P. NUSSBAUM, G. F. NUSSBAUM, W. F. NUSSBAUM,
A. G. NUSSBAUM AND L. J. NUSSBAUM, D/B/A AMARILLO Bus COM-
PANY, EMPLOYER and LOCAL DIVISION 1424, AMALGAMATED ASSOCIA-
TION OF STREET, ELECTRIC RAILWAY AND MOTOR COACH EMPLOYEES
OF AMERICA, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 16-1C-46.-Decided August 18, 1948
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing officer
of the National Labor Relations Board. The hearing officer's rulings
made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby
affirmed.
Upori the entire record in the case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer 1 is the only local bus company in Amarillo, Texas,
a city of about 70,000 population. The only other means of public
transportation is by taxicab. The Employer furnishes bus service
to or near three railroad depots and to many manufacturing establish-
ments whose products move in interstate commerce.
The record contains explicit testimony concerning the service that
the Employer's busses provide for the employees of 10 such establish-
ments, including The American Smelting & Refining Co., The General
Mills Corporation, and other national enterprises. For example, a
representative of one of these companies, producing over $4,000,000
worth of goods annually, nine-tenths of which are shipped out of the
State, testified that almost 40 percent of its 300 employees depend
upon the Employer's busses to get to and from work, and that, if bus
service became unavailable, the plant's operations would be seriously
impaired. We are not ready to join in the assumptions contained in
the dissenting opinion concerning the habits of visitors to Amarillo
and of the working population of that substantial community.
I M. P. Nussbaum, G. F. Nussbaum, W. F. Nussbaum, A. G. Nussbaum and L. J. Nussbaum
are a partnership doing business as Amarillo Bus Company . The petition and other formal
papers are amended to show the correct name of the Employer.
78 N. L. R. B., No. 158.
1103
1104 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
During 1947 the Employer, at an approximate cost of .$7,400 each,
purchased through Texas agencies five Ford busses, all of which
were manufactured outside the State of Texas. During the same
period, the Employer purchased, outside the State of Texas, money
changers valued at approximately $600. During the same period,
the Employer expended approximately $7,000 on tires through a tire
rental arrangement with the sales agency of B. F. Goodrich Tire
Company in Dallas, Texas. The tires are manufactured in Ohio.
On these facts, and particularly the dependence of this city's prin-
cipal industries upon the Employer's services, we find, contrary to.
the contention of the Employer, that the Employer is engaged in
activities affecting commerce within the meaning of the Act. The
Employer's motion to dismiss on the above basis is hereby denied.2
2. The labor organization named below claims to represent employees
of the Employer.3
3.. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employer, within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner desires to represent a unit limited to employees
classified as bus drivers. In the alternative, it is willing to represent
a unit including bus drivers and maintenance employees. The posi-
tion of the Employer is not clear, but, from the testimony at the hear-
ing, the Employer seems to be in favor of the larger unit.
The Employer employs approximately 80 drivers, 10 mechanics,
7 of whom do part-time or occasional driving, 3 clean-up men, and
1 lubrication employee, and a token man.
Drivers operate under an established seniority system and receive
a progressive rate of pay from approximately 85 cents to $1 per hour.
One driver of 15 years' seniority was, at the time of the hearing, because
of ill health, selling tokens and checking records instead of driving.
Mechanics operate under no regular seniority system and their rate
of pay varies from 85 cents to $1.40 per hour. Most mechanics
receive $1.15 per hour. Two mechanics drive a regular school bus
run at 9 a. in. and at 3 p. in. They work as mechanics during the
remainder of the day. They accumulate seniority as drivers, but
are paid as mechanics whether they are driving or working in the
shop. Five other mechanics who do part-time driving may be called
to drive for a double-head or emergency trip, transporting passengers
2 See Matter of Safety Motor Transit Company , 78 N. L R. B 831 , and cases cited
therein ; Matter of Baltimore Transit Co ., 47 N. L. R B. 109, enf ' d 140 F. ( 2d) 51, cert. den.
321 U S. 795.
1Inasmuch as our investigation discloses that the Petitioner is in compliance with Sec-
tion 9 (f), (g), and (h) of the Act , the Employer 's motion to dismiss, on the basis of non-
compliance , is hereby denied.
AMARILLO BUS COMPANY 1105
over a regular bus route. They acquire no seniority as drivers and
are paid as mechanics whether they are driving or working in the
shop. Other maintenance men do not drive busses to transport
passengers.
In numerous cases the Board has held that either a unit of drivers
and maintenance employees or a unit limited to drivers may be appro-
priate for collective bargaining.4 There has been no past bargaining
history concerning the employees of the Employer. The Petitioner
would preferably limit the unit to drivers. Due to the close integra-
tion of activities and interchange among the Employer's drivers and
mechanics, however, it is our opinion that the combined unit of drivers
and maintenance employees is more appropriate.
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 employees of the Employer, including bus drivers, mechanics,
part-time driver-mechanics, clean-up men, lubricating men, and token
men, but excluding office and clerical employees, guards, professional
employees, and supervisors as defined by the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by
secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible,.but not later than
30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and
supervision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this
case was heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National
Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, among the
employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4,
above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees
who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or
on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who
have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired
or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding
employees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine
whether or not they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective
bargaining, by Local Division 1424, Amalgamated Association of
Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of America,
AFL.
4 See Matter of Norfolk Southern Bus Co , 76 N. L. R. B. 488; Matter of Illsnt Coach
Company, 72 N. L. R. B. 408; and Matter of Auto Interurban Company, 73 N. L. R. B. 214
and cases cited therein.
1106 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
MEMBER GRAY, dissenting :
In taking jurisdiction in this case, the majority relies upon the
transit lines serving railroad depots and manufacturing establish-
ments, whose products move in interstate commerce, and upon the Em-
ployer's purchase of busses and bus equipment during the year 1947,
totaling $44,600, which came from outside the State of Texas.
Persons arriving at or leaving railroad stations fall into two cate-
gories : commercial travelers and "pleasure" travelers. The first cus-
tomarily have baggage, including sample cases and catalogs. That
group, strangers to the community, unfamiliar with locations of their
places of visit, and with a load of baggage, normally use taxicabs to
reach their local destinations.
"Pleasure" travelers are mostly accompanied between home and
station by relatives who convey the traveler in privately owned automo-
biles. So, in case of a stoppage over labor disputes in this case, there
could be little, if any, effect upon interstate commerce.
Employees of manufacturing establishments, whose operations are
regarded as affecting commerce, generally do not in any substantial
degree use or depend upon public transportation lines to get to or from
their work in small communities. Today they use their own automo-
biles or double up with others. Those living nearby, walk. The pro-
portion of employees riding public transportation is very small, espe-
cially in communities of this size.
When a labor dispute disrupts operations of a local transit line, resi-
dents in reality would not be prevented from getting to work. People
do not stay home from work for lack of one means of transportation
when other means are available, or when, in small communities, short
distances make walking easy.
Because in my judgment there would be little, if any, interference
with the flow of interstate commerce should a labor dispute interfere
with the operations of Amarillo Bus Company, I would not assert
jurisdiction, and would dismiss the petition.