Oklahoma Transportation Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

May 4, 1949

83 N.L.R.B. 369 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter of OKLAHOMA TRANSPORTATION COMPANY, EMPLOYER
and LODGE 850, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS,
PETITIONER
Case No. 16-RC-327.-Decided May 4, 1949
DECISION
AND
ORDER
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before James R.
Webster, a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from preju-
dicial 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 [Chairman Herzog and Members
Houston 'and Murdock].
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 Intervenor, Local Division 993, Amalga-
mated Association of Street, Electric Railway & Motor Coach Em-
ployees of America, are labor organizations claiming a representative
interest in certain employees involved herein.
3. No 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, for the following
reasons:
The Employer operates an intercity transportation system between
Oklahoma City and other cities in Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Texas.
The Oklahoma Railway Company, herein called the Railway, operates
an intracity transportation system in Oklahoma City and its environs.
Both companies are jointly owned by the same three stockholders. In
1947, the owners of the two companies decided to discontinue the sep-
arate operation of the Employer's maintenance shops in Oklahoma
City, and to consolidate this operation with the Railway's maintenance
operations. A partial merger was begun with the appointment of a
single operation manager in charge of maintenance for both com-
panies, and a transfer of certain employees from the Employer's
garage to the Railway shops. As these employees were also trans-
83 N. L. R. B., No. 49.
369
370 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
f erred to the Railway's pay roll, and agreement was reached with the
Intervenor, which has a union-shop contract covering the operating
and maintenance employees of the Railway, providing that the Inter-
venor would accept the transferred employees into membership, and
would grant them certain seniority rights.
After the employees of the heavy unit repair shop, which repairs
motors, transmissions, and carburetors, and of the paint and body
shop had been transferred to the Railway, further consolidation was
held up for lack of space. In January.1949, about the time the peti-
tion herein was filed, the Employer transferred the remaining main-
tenance employees to a garage owned by the Railway, but retained
them on its pay roll when it received notice of the instant proceeding.
From all the facts in the case, we find that the Employer initiated
the plan for the consolidation of its maintenance operation in good
faith; that the consolidation would by now have been completed had
it not been temporarily suspended pending outcome of this proceed-
ing; and that, upon completion of the merger, the Employer will have
no employees in the unit sought by the Petitioner.' Under these cir-
cumstances, we conclude that no useful purpose would be served by
directing an election in this proceeding.2 Accordingly, we shall dis-
miss the petition.
ORDER
IT IS ORDERED that the petition herein be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
I The Petitioner requested an alternative unit composed of the Employer ' s maintenance
employees at Oklahoma City and Duncan, Oklahoma , and Fort Smith , Arkansas. The
Employer will retain maintenance employees at Duncan and Fort Smith , but the Petitioner
does not seek a unit of such employees alone, and does not appear to have a representative
interest among them.
2 Matter of Armour & Company , 62 N. L . R. B. 1194.