Southwestern Greyhound Lines, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Mar 21, 1945

60 N.L.R.B. 1388 (N.L.R.B. 1945)

In the Matter Of SOUTHWESTERN GREYI37UND LINES, INC. and BROTH-
ERHOOD OF RAILROAD TRAINMEN
11 Case No. 16-R 1132.-Decided March 21, 1945
Messrs. Mueller and Mueller, by Mr. Karl M. Mueller, of Fort Worth,
Tex., for the Company.
Mr. F. K. Fisk, of Cleveland, Ohio, and Mr. Charles Luna, of Dallas,
Tex., for the Brotherhood.,
Mr. C. W. Van Avery, of Detroit, Mich., Mr. Clayton G. Panter, of
Kansas City, Mo., and Mr. 0. D. Zimring, by Mr. Frederic Meyers, of
Atlanta, Ga., for the Amalgamated.
Mr. Louis Monas, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
AND
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
STATEMENT OF TIIE CASE
Upon a petition duly filed by Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen,
herein called the Brotherhood, alleging that a question affecting com-
merce had arisen concerning the representation of employees of South-
western Greyhound Lines, Inc., Fort Worth, Texas, herein called
the Company, the National Labor Relations Board provided for an
appropriate hearing upon due notice before Glenn L. Moller, Trial
Examiner. Said hearing was held at Fort Worth, Texas, on January
13, 1945. The Company, the Brotherhood, and Amalgamated Asso-
ciation of Street, Electric Railway and Motor CDach Employees of
America, Division 1313, A. F. of L., herein called the Amalgamated,
appeared, participated, and were afforded full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues. The Trial Examiner's rulings made at
the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
All parties were afforded opportunity to file briefs with the Board.
During the course of the proceeding, the Amalgamated moved, on
various occasions, to dismiss the petition. For reasons set forth in
Sections III and IV, infra, the motions are denied.
Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following :
60 N L. R. B, No 242.
1388
SOUTHWESTERN GREYHOUND LINES, INC. 1-389
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE BUSINESS OF TIIE COMPANY
Southwestern Greyhound Lines, Inc., -a Delaware corporation hav-
ing its, principal office in Fort Worth, Texas, is engaged in the busi-
ness of carrying passengers, baggage, and mail by bus over the high-
ways of Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New
Mexico, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas. Its lines connect with those
of other Greyhound companies located throughout the United States,
and it operates pursuant to a Certificate of Convenience and Neces-
sity issued by the Interstate Commerce Commission.
The Company admits that it is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.
II. TIIE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED
Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen is an unaffiliated labor organi-
zation admitting to membership employees of the Company.
Amalgamated Association of Street, Electric Railway and Motor
Coach Employees of America, Division 1313, is a labor organization
affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, admitting to
membership employees of the Company.
III. THE QUESTION CONCERNING REPRESENTATION
On November 7, 1944, the Brotherhood wrote the Company, re-
questing recognition as the collective bargaining representative of
its bus drivers. On November 9, 1944, the Company declined to
recognize the Brotherhood unless it was first certified by the Board
in an appropriate unit.
On September 24, 1942, the Amalgamated simultaneously filed two
petitions with the Board, one alleging as appropriate a unit of "all
motor bus operators," 1 and the other a unit of "dispatchers, ticket
agents, baggage-men, loaders, unloaders, telephone information,
counter information, porters, janitors, red caps, and matrons, ex-
clusive of all supervisory employees." 2 On October 14, 1942, two
consent election agreements were executed by the Company and the
Amalgamated setting forth as separate units those alleged to be
appropriate in the Amalgamated's petitions. Mail' ballot elections
were thereafter conducted among the employees in each unit, and
the Amalgamated, the only labor organization involved, won both
elections.
116-R-531.
2 16-R-532.
1390 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Negotiations by the Company and the Amalgamated for a collec-
tive bargaining agreement commenced on or about December 1, 1942.
On December 30, 1942, the United States Conciliation Service unsue:
cessfully attempted to -adjust certain differences which had arisen
between the parties, and on January 30, 1943, various disputed issues
were certified -to the War Labor Board. On April 24, 1943, at the
insistence of the Eighth Regional War Labor Board, the Amalga-
niated and the Company entered into two "stipulations ," one covering
matters upon which they agreed, and the other matters still in
dispute. During June and , July 1943 , hearings were held before
a panel of the Eighth Regional, War Labor Board which issued its
report and recommendations on August 28, 1943. Subsequently, the
Regional Board issued a Directive Order, dated October 20, 1943,
which, inter alia , directed the parties to enter into a contract con-
taining the following provision :
Except as herein otherwise expressly provided , this agreement
shall be in effect from the date hereof [October 20, 1943] until
and including January 30, 1944, and shall remain in effect from
year to year thereafter , unless changed or terminated as herein
provided. Either party desiring to terminate this agreement at
the end of the initial term or any annual extension thereof
shall notify the other party in writing of such desire at least
sixty days prior to the expiration of such initial term or any
extension thereof.
Both parties then requested that certain changes be made in the
Directive Order,-and argued these matters before the Eighth Regional
War Labor Board. - That agency, on December 8, 1943, issued a
further Directive Order, from which both parties appealed to the
National War Labor Board. Pending review by the National War
Labor Board , the parties executed an "interim" contract on March
10, 1944, incorporating the duration clause set forth in the Regional
War Labor Board's Directive Order of October 20 , 1943. On June
2, 1944, the National War Labor Board issued a Directive Order
which denied the petitions for review save with respect to one
particular matter, and all issues between the parties were conse-
quently resolved . This Directive Order provided that:
... the terms and conditions of employment set forth in said
Directive Orders of October 20, 1943 and December 8 , 1943, shall
govern the relations between the parties and shall be incorporated
in a signed agreement reciting the intention of the parties to have
their relations governed thereby, as ordered by the National War
Labor Board.
SOUTHWESTERN GREYHOUND LINES, INC. 1391
The parties executed a final contract on June 24, 1944, substantially
similar to their "interim" agreement, which again included the dura-
tion clause of the Directive Order of October 20, 1943. On November
25, 1944, having been apprised by then of the Brotherhood's claim
to representation, the Company served timely notice on the Amalgam-
ated of its intention to terminate their contractual relations as of
January 30, 1945.
It is clear that neither the "interim" agreement of March 10, 1944,
nor the final contract of June 24, 1944, constitutes a bar to a present
determination of representatives. Not only did the Brotherhood
inform the Company of its claim to representation prior to the effec-
tive date of the automatic renewal clause contained in these contracts,
but, in addition, the Company forestalled the operation of such clause
by giving the Amalgamated the requisite timely notice of termination.
The Amalgamated contends, however, that the petition should be
dismissed because it has not been afforded a reasonable opportunity
to act for the employees pursuant to the provisions of the National
War Labor Board's Directive Order of June 2, 1944. It asserts that
its representative status should remain undisturbed for a period of
at least 1 year from June 24, 1944, the effective date of its final agree-
ment with the Company. It is true that the Company and the Amal-
gamated incorporated into their final contract the exact language of
the duration clause contained in the Regional War Labor Board's
Directive Order of October 20, 1943, and thus restricted themselves
to a contract for approximately 7 months. Yet they were not pre-
cluded from agreeing to a longer contract term, since the Directive
Order cannot be construed as limiting them to the execution of an
agreement for less than 1 year. We assume, consequently, that the
contract term agreed upon by the parties was deemed by them to be
reasonable, and we shall proceed to an immediate determination of
representatives.3
A statement of a Board Field Examiner, introduced into evidence
at the hearing, indicates that the Brotherhood represents a substantial
number of employees in the unit hereinafter found appropriate'
'See Matter of Thompson Products, Inc, 60 N L R B 885
'The Field Examiner reported that the Brotherhood submitted 242 authorization cards,
223 of which were signed by persons whose names appear on the company pay roll for
the period ending November 15, 1944, containing the names of 583 employees in the
alleged appropriate unit.
The Amalgamated relies , inter aha, upon its contract as evidence of its interest in this
proceeding.
The Amalgamated claims that its cheek-off arrangement with the Company proves
that it represents a majority of the employees in the alleged appropraite unit, and,
therefore , the petition of the Brotherhood should be dismissed . However, inasmuch as
the Brotherhood has made a substantial showing, there exist conflicting claims to repre-
sentation which can best be resolved by an election by secret ballot, particularly in view
of the maintenance-of-membership provision contained in the June 24, 1944, contract
1342• DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
We find that a question affecting commerce has arisen concerning
the representation of employees of the Company in the unit herein-
after found appropriate within the meaning of Section 9 (c) and
Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
4
IV. TI-IE APPROPRIATE ]UNIT
The Brotherhood contends that all regular and extra bus drivers
in the Company's employ, excluding clerical employees, dispatchers,
and all supervisory employees, constitute an appropriate unit. The
Amalgamated urges that the appropriate unit should include terminal
employees as well as bus drivers, taking no position concerning dis-
patchers. The Company is neutral with respect to the appropriate
unit.
In support of its position the Amalgamated points to its two written
agreements with the Company of March 10, 1944, and June 24, 1944,
each of which covered both bus drivers and terminal employees, and
claims that, since 1942 collective bargaining with the Company has
proceeded upon the basis of one unit.
It is significant that the Company's operations are divided into
three departments, the operating department which embraces bus
drivers, the traffic department which -consists of terminal employees,
and the, maintenance department which is composed of maintenance
workers. Each department is under the supervision of a separate
manager. Bus drivers are not only separately supervised, but they
also have separate interests and skills. They are governed by Inter-
state Commerce Commission regulations, must pass exacting and
periodic physical examinations, and are subject to and must follow
company rules pertaining solely to them. They are compensated
on a mileage basis and earn more than terminal employees,5 who are
paid on a fixed 40-hour basis. Bus drivers receive comprehensive
training in the operation of busses. Their working conditions, prob-
lems, job qualifications, required experience and training, are different
from those of terminal employees.
As set forth in Section III, supra, the Amalgamated filed two peti-
Lions with the Board on September 24, 1942, one-averring that a unit
of bus drivers was appropriate, and the other a separate unit of
terminal employees. It was as a result of separate consent elections
subsequently held among the employees in each group that the Amal-
gamated established its representative status'." While the Amalgam-
6 Regular bus drivers receive from $300 to $350 per month, whereas the highest, paid
terminal employees earn a base pay of $185 per month, most of them earning considerably
less.
6 On September 14, 1937, self-determination elections were directed by the Board among
three groups of employees of several of the Greyhound organizations, including the Com-
pany. These groups were bus drivers, maintenance employees, and all other employees
SOUTHWESTERN GREYHOUND LINES, INC. 1393
ated's 1944 contracts with the Company purported to merge bus
drivers and terminal employees, they contained special provisions
for each group which were separately negotiated on behalf of the
Company. Moreover, grievances for bus drivers have been presented
to-the supervisory staff of the operating department, subject only to
final appeal to the Company's president.
We are satisfied from the foregoing facts, that a separate 'unit of
bus drivers is appropriate. Consequently, we find that all regular
and extra bus drivers employed by the Company, excluding clerical,
employees, dispatchers, and all supervisory employees with authority,
to hire, promote, discharge, discipline, or otherwise effect changes in
the status of employees, or effectively recommend such action, con-
stitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining,
within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.
V. THE DETERMINATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
We shall direct that the question concerning representation which
has arisen be resolved by an election by secret ballot among the em-
ployees in the appropriate unit who were employed during the pay-
roll period immediately preceding the date of the Direction of Elec-
tion herein, subject to the limitations and additions set forth in the
Direction.
The Regional Director, in conformity with customary practice, may
conduct the balloting, in whole or in part, by mail, if such procedure is
deemed by him to be expedient.
DIRECTION OF ELECTION
By virtue of and pursuant to the power vested in the National Labor
Relations Board by Section 9 (c) of the National Labor Relations
Act, and pursuant to Article III, Section 9, of National Labor Rela-
tions Board Rules and Regulations-Series 3, as amended, it is hereby
DIRECTED that, as part of the investigation to ascertain representa-
tives for the purposes of collective bargaining with Southwestern
Greyhound Lines, Inc., Fort Worth, Texas, an election by secret ballot
shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than sixty (60)
days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super-
vision of the Regional Director for the Sixteenth Region, acting in
This matter as agent for the National Labor Relations Board, and
,!subject to Article III, Sections 10 and 11, of said Rules and Regula-
n(terminal and clerical employees ). See Matter of Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, et at.,
,i3 N L R B 622 The International Association of Machinists won the election held
,,among maintenance employees, was certified by the Board in a unit of such employees, and
,I has since bargained for them No union was ever designated as the representative of any
1I1of the other employees until the consent elections of October 1942.
628563-45-vol. 60-89
1394 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
tuns, -among the employees in the unit found appropriate in 'Section
IV, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately
preceding the date of this Direction , including employees who did not
work during the said pay =roll period because they were ill or on vaca-
tion or temporarily laid off , and including employees in the armed
forces of the United States who present themselves in person at the
polls, but excluding any who have since quit or been discharged for
cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of, the
election, to determine whether they desire to be represented by Brother-
hood of Railroad Trainmen , or by Amalgamated Association, of Street,'
Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of America , Division
1313, A. F. of L., for the purposes of collective bargaining, or by
neither.