Maine Central Transportation Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 12, 1948

80 N.L.R.B. 281 (N.L.R.B. 1948)

In the Matter of MAINE CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION Co., EMPLOYER and
AMALGAMATED ASSOCIATION OF STREET, ELECTRIC RAILWAY, AND
MOTOR COACH EMPLOYEES OF AMERICA, A. F. L., PETITIONER
Case No.1-RC-5599.Decided November 1 2,1948
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
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.
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-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board
Members.*
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of
the National Labor Relations Act.
2. The Petitioner and the intervening unions, Brotherhood of Rail-
road Trainmen (herein called the BRT) and International Association
of Machinists (herein called the IAM), are labor organizations claim-
ing to represent certain employees of the Employer.
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 appropriate units :
The Petitioner seeks a single system-wide unit of bus operators,
mechanical employees, and ticket sellers employed by the Employer.
* Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and Gray.
1 The Employer and the BAT are parties to a collective bargaining contract effective
August 30, 1947 , for a 1-year period , and automatically renewable from year to year in
the absence of notice to modify or terminate given 60 days prior to the termination date.
The BRT asserts this contract as a bar to the present proceeding. The Petitioner gave
notice of its claim to representation by letter to the Employer dated June 26, 1948, and
filed its petition herein July 2, 1948 . We find no merit in the contention of the BRT.
Matter of Hawasian Dredging Company , Limited, 72 N. L. R. B. 1378 , and cases cited
therein.
80 N. L. R. B., No. 58.
281
282 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The BRT and the IAM contend that separate units for bus operators
and mechanical employees are appropriate, and argue that the bargain-
ing history precludes establishment of the unit sought by the Peti-
tioner. The Employer takes no position with respect to the unit place-
ment of bus operators and mechanical employees, but contends that
ticket sellers should not be included in any unit found appropriate.
Neither the BRT nor the IAM seeks to represent ticket sellers,
The Employer provides passenger bus transportation service be-
tween communities in Maine, New Hampshire, and Canada, and em-
ploys approximately 67 bus operators, 37 mechanical employees, and 3
ticket sellers. The bus operators pick up their busses at and operate
from Portland, Lewiston, Augusta, and Bangor, Maine, and a number
of smaller communities; the mechanical employees work in garages lo-
cated in the 4 named cities; and the ticket sellers are employed only
at Lewiston.
At Lewiston all three groups of employees, and at Bangor the bus
operators and mechanical employees, are under common local super-
vision. At Portland and Augusta, however, the bus operators and
mechanical employees are under separate local supervision. In emer-
gencies, mechanical employees act as bus operators. Conditions of
employment of all three groups are substantially similar.
Since about 1933, the bus operators have been represented in a sepa-
rate unit by the BRT. Since 1945, and as the result of a consent elee.-
tion conducted by the Board in November 1944, the mechanical employ-
ees have been represented in a separate unit by the IAM 2 Prior to
that time the mechanical employees had been represented in a separate,
unit by the Petitioner. The ticket sellers have never been represented,
for collective bargaining purposes.3
In view of the factors pointing toward the common interests of
the groups here involved,4 but considering the contrary factors point-
ing toward the separation of their interests,5 and in line with our past
decisions in cases involving public motor bus companies in which we
permitted the employees involved to indicate their preferences as to
2 By letter , dated April 17, 1948, the IAM terminated its then existing contract with
the Employer as of June 27, 1948.
'In addition to the normal functions associated with their title, the ticket sellers act
as baggage agents and information clerks. We find that the ticket sellers are an integral
part of the Employer 's operations , and that their work is interrelated with that of the em-
ployees in the other two groups . See Matter of Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, at al.,
3 N. L. It. B. 622, 634; Matter o f Richmond Greyhound Lines, Inc., 52 N. L. R. B. 1532,
65 N. L R B. 234; Matter of Central Greyhound Lines, Inc., 55 N. L. It. B. 504.
4 Particularly the general integration of the Employer's operations , the common super-
vision in certain local areas, and the similarity of conditions of employment . See Matter
of Wentworth Bus Lines , Inc., 51 N. L. It. B. 1345, and cases cited therein ; Matter of St.
Louis Public Service Company , 77 N L. R B. 749; Matter of Amarillo Bus Company, 78.
N. L. It. B . 1103 ; and cases cited in footnote 3, supra
5 Particularly the history of successful collective bargaining in separate units for the-
bus operators and mechanical employees.
MAINE CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION CO. 283
bargaining units,6 we find that the bus operators, the mechanical em-
ployees, and the ticket sellers may, within the meaning of Section 9
(b) of the Act, constitute either a single combined unit, or three sepa-
rate appropriate units. Accordingly, we shall direct that separate
elections be held among the following voting groups :
1. All bus operators employed by the Employer, excluding super-
visors as defined in the Act;
2. All mechanical employees employed by the Employer, excluding
supervisors as defined in the Act;
3. All ticket sellers employed by the Employer, excluding super-
visors as defined in the Act.
We shall, however, make no final unit determination at this time,
but shall first ascertain the desires of these employees as expressed
in the elections. If a majority in each group vote for the Petitioner,
they will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a single
combined unit.7
DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with the Employer, separate elec-
tions 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, as amended,
among the employees in each of the voting groups described in para-
graph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll
period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Elections,
including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period
because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but ex-
cluding 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 :
(1) Whether or not the employees in group 1, above, desire to be
represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Amalgamated
0 Matter of Jersey City & Lyndhurst Bus Company, 49 N. L. R. B. 1087 ; Matter of Iiiini
Coach Company, 72 N. L. R. B. 408; Matter of Auto Interurban Company, 73 N. L R. B.
214; Matter of Texas of Pacific Motor Transport Company, 77 N. L. R. B. 87 ; and cases
cited in footnote 3, supra.
4 The Petitioner, in any or all of the elections herein , or the IAM in the election among
voting group 2, may, upon its prompt request to , and approval thereof by, the Regional
Director, have its name removed from the ballot.
284 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Association of Street, Electric Railway, and Motor Coach Employees
of America, A. F. L.; 8
(2) Whether the employees in group 2, above, desire to be repre-
sented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Amalgamated As-
sociation of Street, Electric Railway, and Motor Coach Employees of
America, A. F. L., or by International Association of Machinists, or
by neither;
(3) Whether or not the employees in group 3, above, desire to be
represented, for purposes of collective bargaining, by Amalgamated
Association of Street, Electric Railway, and Motor Coach Employees
of America, A. F. L.
9 As the BAT has not complied with Section 9 (f) and (h) of the amended Act, its name
will not be placed on the ballot.