Beaumont City Lines, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Aug 8, 1950

90 N.L.R.B. 1800 (N.L.R.B. 1950)

In the Matter of BEAUMONT CITY LINES, INC., AND PORT ARTHUR CITY
LINES, INC., EMPLOYERS an-d- TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF
AMERICA,' CIO, PETITIONER
Case No. 39-RC-193-Decided August 8, 1950
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National Labor
Relations Act, a hearing was held before Charles Y. Latimer, hearing
officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free front
prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
this case to a three-member panel [Members Houston, Reynolds, and
Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employers are Texas corporations engaged in the operation
of city bus lines in Beaumont and Port Arthur, Texas, under franchises
granted by those municipalities. The Beaumont Company operates 60
busses on 6 regular routes and received total operating revenues during
1949 of $630,881 from 1,693,723 miles of operations. Purchases during
the same period included approximately 400,000 gallons of gasoline
and 6,000 gallons of lubricating oil valued at $38,000 and $3,000 re-
spectively. Revenues from bus advertising contracted with the Trans-
portation Advertising Company of Chicago amounted to $3,871 in
1.949. The Beaumont lines service bus terminals, railways, refineries,
and manufacturing companies in and around the city of Beaumont
including the Magnolia Refinery employing approximately 3,800 em-
ployees.
Passenger revenues received by the Port Arthur Company during
the year 1949 amounted.to $254,979 from operations of 737,887 miles.
Gasoline and oil purchases during that year amounted to $42,000 and
$680 respectively. During 1949 the Company also purchased motor
coaches valued at approximately $42,000 from General Motors Com-
pany, Detroit, Michigan. Routes operated by the Port Arthur Com-
pany service railways, bus terminals, and industrial concerns engaged
in interstate commerce, including refineries of- the Gulf Oil Company
and the Texas..Company.
90 NLRB No. 227.
1800
BEAUMONT CITY LINE'S, INC. 1801
Both Employers are wholly owned subsidiaries of National City
Lines, Inc., Chicago, Illinois, and operate under the supervision of an
assistant operations manager of that firm.' Contrary to the conten-
tion of the Employers, and on the facts set forth above, we find that
the Employers are engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
National Labor Relations Act.2
.2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent employees
of the Employers.3
3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa-
tion of employees of the Employers within the meaning of Section
9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4. The Petitioner requests that we find appropriate a unit consist-
ing of all bus operators and maintenance employees of the Employ-
ers' lines in Port Arthur and Beaumont including repairmen, utility
employees, and service employees but excluding all office, clerical, and
supervisory personnel and all other employees. The Intervenor agrees
with the unit request of the Petitioner while the Employers contend
the Board should find a separate unit for each of the two companies
appropriate.
. The cities of Port Arthur and Beaumont are approximately 20 miles
apart. Thirty-five coach operators and 9 maintenance men are em-
ployed at the Port Arthur operations while the Beaumont Company
utilizes 86 operators and 20 maintenance employees. The 2 firms are
separate legal entities but their officers and those of National City
Lines are identical. Operations at both locations are under the su-
pervision of an assistant operations manager of National City Lines,
Inc., while local control is exercised by a transportation superintendent
at each city.' Hiring and discharge of personnel is done locally and
there is no interchange of operating and maintenance personnel below
the supervisory level. Revenues are deposited locally and payrolls are
made up by each Employer. Since 1937 the Intervenor has repre-
sented employees at both Port Arthur and Beaumont in 1 group. Con-
tractual negotiations for both operations since that time to the present
' National City Lines, Inc., is a holding company located in Chicago, Illinois, with wholly
owned subsidiaries at Pontiac, Saginaw, Kalamazoo, and Jackson, Michigan ; Terre Haute,
Indiana ; Portsmouth, and Canton, Ohio ; Aurora, Elgin, Decatur, Joliet, Quincy, Bloom-
ington, Campaign-Urbana, Danville, and East St. Louis, Illinois ; Cedar Rapids, Burlington,
and Ottumwa, Iowa; Montgomery and Mobile, Alabama ; Jackson, Mississippi ; Tampa,
Florida ; Lincoln, Nebraska ; and Tulsa, Oklahoma, as well as the companies involved herein.
2 See Gate City Transportation Lines, Inc., 81 NLRB 79 and cases cited therein.
2 Amalgamated Association, of Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of
America, AFL, Local Division 1031, herein called the Intervenor, was allowed to intervene
at the hearing without objection upon the showing of a contractual interest in the repre-
sentation of these employees.
"The assistant operations manager in. charge of the two lines concerned in this pro-
ceeding also supervises the operations of the Jackson, Mississippi ; Tampa, Florida ; Mont-
gomery and Mobile, Alabama, lines. ,
1802 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
have been conducted by a single committee for both Employers and
representatives of the Intervenor in joint bargaining sessions. Iden-
tical contracts for each company are signed by the same individuals
and approved by the total membership of the Intervenor. Likewise
arbitration proceedings, matters litigated before the War Labor Board,
and final grievance procedures have been conducted on the basis of
single representation for the employees at both locations. While at
one time differences in operations existed between Port Arthur and
Beaumont, at the present time, wages, hours, and working conditions
are the same. In view of the identity of ownership and control of
the 2 companies, the common wages, hours, and working conditions at
Port Arthur and Beaumont and the uniform history of joint collec-
tive bargaining for the 2 operations, we find that a single unit con-
sisting of all coach operators and maintenance employees of the
Employers' lines in Port Arthur and Beaumont, Texas, including all
repairmen, utility employees, and service employees, but excluding
all office and clerical employees and supervisors as defined in the
amended Act, and all other employees, constitutes a unit appropriate
for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Sec-
tion 9 (b) of the Act.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION 5
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employers, 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, among the employees
in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who
were employed during the payroll period immediately preceding the
date of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not
work during said payroll 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 rein-
stated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding employees
on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether
they desire to be represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by
Transport Workers Union of America, CIO, or by Amalgamated
Association of Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees
of America, AFL, Local Division 1031, or by neither.
6 Either participant in the election directed herein may, upon its prompt request to, and
approval thereof by , the Regional Director , have its name removed from the ballot.