Philadelphia Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 10, 1949

84 N.L.R.B. 115 (N.L.R.B. 1949)

In the Matter Of PHILADELPHIA COMPANY AND ASSOCIATED COMPA--
NIES,, EMPLOYER and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL-
WORKERS, LOCAL 149, AFL, PETITIONER
Case No. 6 RC-305.-Decided Jvme 10, 1949
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing in this matter was held before-
Erwin Lerten, hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board.
The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudi-
cial error and are hereby affirmed.'
Pursuant to the provision 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 is a labor organization claiming to represent em-
ployees of the Employer.
3. The question concerning representation :
On July 13, 1948, the Board issued a Decision and Certification of=
the Petitioner following an election held in June 1948 pursuant to a
Stipulation for Consent Election entered into between the Employer
and Petitioner.2 This Stipulation included all employees of the Gen-
eral Department of the Employer but specifically excluded collectors,
traffic receipts, assistant collectors traffic receipts, and chauffeur guard
relief men, the employees herein petitioned for. On December 20,
1948, the Petitioner and the Employer entered into a collective bar-
gaining agreement which was specifically restricted to the unit for
which the Petitioner was certified. The contract will terminate on
September 30, 1949. The Employer contends that the consent election
1 A motion made by the Employer at the conclusion of the hearing to dismiss the instant
petition on grounds hereinafter discussed was reserved by the hearing officer for the Board.
The motion is hereby denied.
2 Case No. 6-RC-64.
84 N. L. R. B., No. 19.
115
116 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
held in June 1948 constitutes a bar to the present petition under the
provisions of Section 9 (c) (3) of the amended Act 3 and that the
petition should therefore be dismissed. The Employer further urges
that the agreement of December 20, 1948, bars an election at this time.
We do not agree. As the consent election specifically excluded the
group of employees petitioned for herein, we find that an election
among these employees would not involve the same bargaining unit or
subdivision thereof within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (3) of the Act,
as amended .4 As to the contract, it is apparent that this agreement did
not cover the employees sought to be represented here. Nor is the ex-
press exclusion of these employees from the coverage clause of the con-
tract tantamount to an agreement by the contracting union not to
represent them.' In these circumstances, the contract does not bar a
present determination of representatives.
We find, therefore, that a question affecting commerce exists con-
cerning the representation 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 unit :
The Petitioner seeks to represent all collectors traffic receipts, assist-
ant collectors traffic receipts, and chauffeur guard relief men of the
Employer. The Petitioner desires to include these employees in the
unit of clerical employees it now represents in the Employer's General
Department.6 The Employer's position is that the employees covered
by the petition are guards and, under Section 9 (b) (3) of the amended
Act, the Petitioner, who admits to membership employees other than
guards, may not be certified as their representative.? The Employer
further urges that the collectors traffic receipts are supervisors as de-
fined in Section 2 (11) of the Act and should be excluded from any unit
found appropriate.
The Employer, a Pennsylvania corporation, is a public utility hold-
ing company for several associated corporations including Pittsburgh
Railways Company. Pittsburgh Railways Company is a common
carrier providing public transportation by street railway and motor
3 Section 9 (c) (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, provides in part:
"No election shall be directed in any bargaining unit or any subdivision within which,
in the preceding twelve-month period, a valid election shall have been held."
4 Matter of Tin Processing Corporation, 80 N L. R B. 1369
' Matter of Standard Lime and Stone Company, 74 N L R B. 393; Matter of Burd Piston
Ring Company, 75 N. L R B 879
0 This is the same unit as certified by the Board in Case No 6-RC-64.
'Section 9 ( b) (3) provides:
. . . the Board shall not . . decide that any unit is appropriate . . . If it includes,
together with other employees , any individual employed as a guard to enforce against
employees and other persons rules to protect property of the employer or to protect the
safety of persons on the employer 's premises ; but no labor organization shall be cer-
tified as the representative of employees in a bargaining unit of guards if such oigani-
zation admits to membership , or is affiliated directly or indirectly with an organization
which admits to membership , employees other than guards" ( Emphasis supplied.)
PHILADELPHIA -COMPANY AND ASSOCIATED COMPANIES 117
• coach in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and vicinity. The employees here-
in petitioned for collect and transport the fare receipts from the Em-
ployer's various car barns and perform certain clerical work con-
nected therewith. There are 18 employees in this group. Two of them
do only clerical work in the office and 3 others spend the majority of
-their time clerical work, but occasionally' serve as relief men for the
-regular collection crews. All are employees of the Counting Room
Division of the Employer's Treasury Department. A collection crew
-is composed of a collector traffic receipts, assistant collector traffic re-
ceipts, and a chauffeur guard relief man. They use an ordinary panel
truck which does not have any special protective equipment to travel
to the various car barns of the Employer in the area around Pittsburgh.
On arrival at a car barn the collector obtains the key to the fare boxes
from the safe in the dispatcher's office and opens the boxes. The assist-
ant collector and chauffeur guard empty the fare boxes into large
metal containers, put on the lids and lock them. One man records the
fare box numbers and the other counts the transfers and hand collec-
tions and collects any lost articles that have been turned in. The
collector sorts the various bags of coins and currency, separates
the currency for the various ticket receipts turned in by the trainmen,
counts them and compares his totals with those of the dispatcher.
These figures are then checked by the assistant collector and the metal
containers are loaded on the truck.
After making calls at the required number of car barns a crew will
return to the main office where the metal containers are removed from
the truck, placed on hand carts and taken to the Counting Room.
There the collection crews prepare deposit slips, place the coins into
-machines which sort them, wrap the coins in stacks and put them into
bags. The crews then transport the money to the bank in a panel
truck. Approximately 29 percent of each crew's time is spent in
transporting the money from the car barns to the main office and
bank. The remainder is consumed in the sorting, collecting, and
recording of fare receipts.
The employees here involved are not deputized or uniformed. Al-
though they are armed they are not trained in the use of firearms.
They have no permits to carry guns and have been instructed not to
resist if robbery is attempted. They are not responsible for the en-
forcement of any of the Employer's rules or regulations affecting
other employees or those not in the employ of the Employer. Indeed,
they themselves are checked by so-called general agents of the Em-
ployer who frequently spot-check the collection crew to see that they
follow their required routine. If any fare boxes or money containers
appear to have been tampered with, the general agents investigate
the circumstances.
853396-50-vol. 84-9
118 ' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Employer contends that since the collection employees are
responsible for the safe handling of valuable property of the Employer
they are'guards. Presumably, the Employer is contending that in
the exercise of this responsibility these employees "enforce . . . rules
to protect property of the employer" within the meaning of Section
-9 (b) (3). This argument proves too much. ImplicitIn the obli-
gation to his employer of every truck driver or other employee han-
dling and transporting property of the employer is the responsibility
-for the safekeeping of that property. We cannot believe that Con-
gress intended the restriction which we are required to impose upon
the representation of guards to be applied on so broad a basis. On
the facts set forth above, we conclude that the employees sought to
be represented by the Petitioner herein are, in essence, armed ex-
pressmen. They are hired not to guard property, but rather to collect
and transport the Employer's money and perform the necessary inci-
dental clerical tasks. As such, they are not guards within the mean-
ing of Section 9 (b) (3) and the Petitioner is not disqualified from
acting as their representative."
We further find that the Employer's contention that the employees
designated as collectors traffic receipts are supervisors as defined in
Section 2 (11) of the Act is without merit. There is no evidence in
the record that these collectors possess any authority to hire, transfer,
suspend, lay-off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or disci-
pline any other employees, or to make effective recommendations with
respect to such action. Although they direct certain aspects of the
work of the other members of the collection crew, the work is essen-
tially of a routine character. Accordingly, we find the collectors
traffic receipts are not supervisors as defined in the Act. Further, we
find that they have the same working conditions and interests its the
other employees described in the petition and shall include them in
the unit hereinafter found appropriate.
The employees herein petitioned for are under the supervision of
the cashier of the Treasury Department of the Employer. However,
their general duties, wages, hours, working conditions, and benefits
are comparable to those of the clerical employees in the General
Department, whom the Petitioner currently represents. For several
years prior to June 1948 these employees were in a single unit together
with the General Department employees and were represented for the
purposes of collective bargaining by a labor organization other than
the Petitioner. In view of the foregoing, we believe the collectors
traffic receipts, assistant collectors traffic receipts, and chauffeur guard
Cf Matter of Brinks Incorporated , 77 N L R B 1182 , Matter of American Dart, ict
Telegraph 'Company, 83 N L R. B. 517.
PHILADELPHIA COMPANY AND ASSOCIATED COMPANIES 119
relief men have community of interest with employees of the General
Department which warrants including them in the General De-
partment unit. However, the collectors traffic receipts , and assistant
collectors traffic receipts , and chauffeur guard relief men are not
covered by the existing contract applicable to the employees of the
General Department . We shall, therefore ; grant these employees the
opportunity to express through an election their desires as to whether
they desire to be added to the established unit of General Department
employees currently represented by the Petitioner.
We shall direct an election among the collectors traffic receipts,
assistant collectors traffic receipts , and chauffeur guard relief men at
the Employer 's Pittsburgh , Pennsylvania , office, excluding all office
clerical and professional employees , guards, general agents, and super-
visors as defined in the Act. If a majority of the employees voting
cast their ballots for the Petitioner , they will be taken to have indicated
their desire to be a part of the larger unit of General Department
employees for the purposes of collective bargaining and we will amend
the prior certification to include the above employees in the larger
unit. Such amended certification will not be construed as a present
recertification of the Petitioner with respect to the employees certified
on July 13, 1948, in Case No. 6-RC-64. If a majority of the employees
vote against the Petitioner we shall dismiss the petition.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the
purposes of collective bargaining with Philadelphia Company and
Associated Companies, a separate 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 Sixth Region, 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 the voting
group described 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
]aid 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
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 149, AFL.