Tamiami Trails Tours, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jun 4, 1959

123 N.L.R.B. 1501 (N.L.R.B. 1959)

TAMIAMI TRAIL TOURS, INC. 1501
'Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc. and Lodge 851, Brotherhood of Rail-
road Trainmen , AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case No. 19-RC-494.
June 4, 1959
DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTIONS
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before Robert Westheimer,
hearing officer. 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 Act, the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Bean and Fanning].
Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
2. The labor organizations involved claim to represent certain em-
ployees 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 Petitioner seeks a unit of motorcoach operators, ticket and
express agents, and porters. The Employer and the Intervenor assert
that the appropriate unit is one limited to the motorcoach operators
represented by the Intervenor .2
The Employer is engaged in bus transportation of passengers and
light express among 110 terminals in south Georgia and Florida.
The motorcoach operators drive the buses, handle baggage and ex-
press, and sell some tickets en route. They undergo intensive training
1 The Employer contends that its contract with the Intervenor, Division 1250, Amal-
gamated Association of Street , Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of America,
AFL-CIO, covering motorcoach operators, and effective from March 22, 1957, until
March 21, 1960 , is a bar to this petition , which was filed on January 19, 1959. Under
the contract-bar policy announced by the Board in September 1958, we find that this
contract is of unreasonable duration , and as the petition was timely filed 61 days before
the end of the first 2 years of the contract term, the contract is not a bar. Pacific Coast
Association of Pulp and Paper Manu facturers , 121 NLRB 990. The Employer challenges
the Board's application of this policy to a contract executed before the announcement of
the policy , and contends that the "substantial part of the industry " test , in effect when
the contract in issue was executed , should apply here . We find no merit in this conten-
tion as the Board has held that such revised policy is appliable to all cases decided after
its promulgation . Deluxe Metal Furniture Company , 121 NLRB 995 . Moreover, the
record does not establish that the contract would have been a bar under the "substantial
part of the industry" test.
7 The Intervenor contends that ticket and express agents and porters may not be in-
cluded in the same unit with motorcoach operators because the Board has previously
directed elections in a separate unit of motorcoach operators ( see 64 NLRB 100, and
Case No. 10-RC-361, unpublished). This contention has no merit , because the units
found appropriate in those proceedings were based on stipulations by the parties and are
therefore not controlling here . See Humble Oil and Refining Company , 115 NLRB
1485, 1487.
123 NLRB No. 178.
1502 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and examinations, must have special driving licenses, and wear uni-
forms. These employees are supervised by dispatchers responsible to
division superintendents. Their wages are based on a rate per mile,
with overtime after completing their regular assignments. They occa-
sionally transfer their home station from one terminal to another.
They have been separately represented since 1941.
All the Employer's terminals are operated by independent con-
tractors except the three terminals at Miami, St. Petersburg, and
Pensacola, Florida, where the requested ticket and express agents and
porters are employed. These are the only unrepresented employees of
the Employer. They are supervised by the terminal managers. No
training is required, and no uniforms are worn by these employees.
Wages and overtime are paid on an hourly basis. Porters handle
baggage and do some janitorial work. Ticket and express agents sell
tickets, check baggage, receive and deliver bus express, and give in-
formation to customers. These employees do not transfer from' one
terminal to another. There is no interchange among any of the classi-
fications here involved.
The Board has held that motorcoach operators and terminal em-
ployees may appropriately be included in the same unit, as requested
by the Petitioner.3 However, a separate unit of motorcoach operators,
as requested by the Employer and Intervenor, may be appropriate in
view of their separate interests and bargaining history, and a residual
unit of ticket and express agents and porters may also be appropriate.
Accordingly, we shall make no final unit determination at this time,
but shall direct separate elections among the employees in the follow-
ing two voting groups of the Employer's employees, excluding from
each group office clerical employees, truckdrivers, garage and mainte-
nance employees, district passenger agents, dispatchers, and all other
supervisors as defined in the Act :
Group 1: All motorcoach operators 4
Group 2: All ticket and express agents and porters.
At the hearing, the Petitioner alternatively expressed its willing-
ness to represent the employees in the two groups as separate units,
and it has an adequate interest showing in each. We shall therefore
place its name on the ballot in the elections among employees in both
groups. In accord with the Intervenor's request, we shall place its
name on the ballot in the group 1 election only. Contrary to the
3 Safeway Trails, Inc., 120 NLRB 79.
4 At the hearing the Intervenor indicated that student motorcoach operators should be
allowed to vote. These students are applicants for jobs as motorcoach operators, whose
qualifications are under observation by the Employer. Students spend their time observ-
ing the Employer's various operations and learning Interstate Commerce Commission
rules. Although they may later be hired and placed on probation for 90 days, students
are not on the payroll and do not drive buses. Under these circumstances, we find that
student motorcoach operators are not employees, but are applicants. They are therefore
not eligible to vote.
THE CROSS COMPANY 1503
Petitioner's contention at the hearing, we find, in agreement with the
Intervenor, that the technique of pooling votes is inappropriate in a
situation such as this where it is sought to add a previously unrepre-
sented group to an existing unit .-5
If the Intervenor wins in group 1, or if the Petitioner wins in
group 1 or 2 alone, then the employees in group 1 or 2, as the case
may be, will be taken to have indicated their desire to constitute a
separate unit, and the Regional Director conducting the elections
directed herein is instructed to issue a certification of representatives
to the bargaining agent so selected for such separate unit or units,
which the Board, in the circumstances, finds to be appropriate for
purposes of collective bargaining.
If, however, the Petitioner wins the elections in both groups, the
employees in these groups will be taken to have indicated their desire
to constitute a single combined unit, and the Regional Director is in-
structed to issue a certification of representatives to the Petitioner for
such combined unit, which the Board, in the circumstances, finds to
be appropriate.
5. The Employer contends that no election should be conducted
among terminal employees in Miami, St. Petersburg, and Pensacola
because it plans to subcontract operations at these terminals and the
status of these employees is therefore transitory. The record shows
that the Employer's plans in this respect are dependent upon its ob-
taining satisfactory new terminal facilities and operating arrange-
ments, which is at present uncertain. Moreover, the requested ticket
and express agents and porters are currently employed by the Em-
ployer, and a substantial and representative number will continue to
be employed for an indefinite period in the future. We therefore
perceive no reason to deprive them of an opportunity to select a
collective-bargaining representative at this time.6
[Text of Direction of Elections omitted from publication.]
5 Adams Coal Company , Inc., 118 NLRB 1493, footnote 3.
6 See General Electric Company, 101 NLRB 1341, 1344.
The Cross Company and Chris. M. Youngjohn , Agent and Attor-
ney, Petitioner and International Union , United Automobile,
Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America,
UAW-AFL-CIO, Local 155. Cases Nos. 7-RD-272 and 7-RD-275.
June 4, 1959
DECISION AND CERTIFICATION OF REPRESENTATIVES
Pursuant to a stipulation for certification upon consent election,
an election by secret ballot was conducted on November 12, 1958,
123 NLRB No. 168.