The Wackenhut Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 12, 1972

196 N.L.R.B. 278 (N.L.R.B. 1972)

278 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The Wackenhut Corporation and Congreso Central De
Trabajodores Y Oficinistas De Puerto Rico , Distrito
475, Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Work-
men of North America, AFL-CIO, Petitioner. Case
24-RC-4511
April 12, 1972
DECISION AND ORDER
BY.CHAIRMAN MILLER AND MEMBERS JENKINS AND
KENNEDY
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, a hearing
was held before Hearing Officer Joseph M. Chandri.
Following the hearing and pursuant to Section 102.67
of the National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations and Statements of Procedure, Series 8, as
amended, by direction of the Regional Director for
Region 24, this case was transferred to the National
Labor Relations Board for decision. No briefs have
been filed.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has reviewed the Hearing Officer's rul-
ings made at the hearing and finds that they are free
from prejudicial error. They are hereby affirmed.
Upon the entire record in this case the Board finds:
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the
meaning of the Act and it will effectuate the purposes
of the Act to assert jurisdiction herein.
2. The Petitioner and Intervenor' are labor organi-
zations within the meaning of the Act.
3. The Employer is a multinational company en-
gaged in the business of providing services for man-
agement and the professions, including guard and
security services on a contract basis. The Petitioner
has filed a petition seeking an election in a unit of all
toll booth operators employed by the Employer at the
Express Highways San Juan-Ponce and San Juan-
Arecibo in Puerto Rico, excluding all office clerical
employees, professional employees, guards, and su-
pervisors as defined in the Act. Both the Employer
and Intervenor contend that the employees in the unit
sought are guards within the meaning of the Act and
that under the proviso contained in Section 9(b)(3) of
the Act the Petitioner, which represents employees
other than guards, is not qualified to represent these
employees.' The Employer further contends: (1) that
' International Union United Plant Guard Workers of America, and its
Amalgamated Plant Guard Local 112, intervened at the hearing on the basis
of a contract with the Employer alleged to cover the employees involved in
this proceeding
its contract with the Intervenor, covering these em-
ployees, is a bar to an election; and (2) that the peti-
tion is untimely filed as the unit now is composed of
only 40 employees, whereas it will eventually expand
to 500 employees'
In August 1971, the Employer entered into a con-
tract with the Puerto Rico Highway Authority of the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico whereby the Employ-
er agreed to provide the services of employees to be
designated as security toll operators at the express
highways named above. Originally the Highway Au-
thority desired to have the toll barriers manned by
state policemen, but this proved impracticable be-
cause of the prohibitive cost of providing special
training to the large number of such operators that
would ultimately be required. The Authority there-
fore contracted the services of the Employer's security
guard organization "to give the physical security to
the barrier" and "to enforce the regulations that have
been incorporated into the toll road."4
The security toll operators are stationed at cabins
in the expressway toll barrier. They do not themselves
collect the tolls. Rather, each vehicle driver casts the
toll into a special collection basket and if the amount
is correct a red light will automatically turn to green,
thus indicating to the driver that he may proceed. The
operators' functions in this respect consist of (1) clas-
sifying vehicles approaching the barrier in order to
determine the amount of toll to be paid,' (2) making
change for drivers when necessary, (3) keeping rec-
ords relating to the collection and accounting of tolls
and vehicles processed, and (4) cleaning and policing
the toll booth and immediate area.
Further, the operator is required to check visually
each car as it approaches his cabin to determine
whether or not it should be afforded access to the
turnpike. The operator checks for physical defects
which might make the vehicle a hazard on the turn-
pike, such as worn tires, defective lights, broken
windshields, or missing fenders. And he also scruti-
nizes the vehicles for drunk drivers. In any of these
2 If, however, the employees are found not to be guards within the meaning
of the Act, then as a practical matter the Intervenor, as the incumbent guard
union , would not seek further to represent these employees.
3In view of our decision herein that the employees sought are guards
within the meaning of the Act, we find it unnecessary to reach , and do not
pass on, the issues of contract bar and timeliness of the petition
4 The above is from the testimony of the Highway Authority's director of
toll facilities . The Employer's job description of the classification of security
toll operator here involved states, in part, that such operator "is charged with
the enforcement of Public Law 141 governing all vehicles , patrolman and
employees and personal property of the Las Americas Turnpike He is further
responsible for the enforcement of all rules and regulations to protect proper-
ty and secure the safety of persons within the perimeter of the toll pike
authority "
S This involves estimating the number of axles ( 15 cents is charged for each
axle over two) and pressing the appropriate button on a console. If this agrees
with the number determined electronically by treadle equipment upon which
the vehicle has stopped, a lighted sign will disclose the exact toll. If there is
a discrepancy the operator must verify his own determination Also a special
button is pressed for vehicles exempted from toll charges.
196 NLRB No. 46
THE WACKENHUT CORPORATION 279
cases the operator stops the offending vehicle and
informs the driver of the deficiency. If a controversy
arises, the operator notifies the plaza supervisor or a
policeman stationed near the barrier who makes the
final disposition of the matter. The operator also is
required to deny access to pedestrians, to bicycle and
motorcycle riders, and to riders on horseback. The
operator will watch out for acts of sabotage. Also the
operator will seek to prevent a driver from making a
"U" turn, reporting this to the policeman on duty
when necessary. On instructions from the plaza super-
visor the operator may shut down his lane to clear it
for ambulance, police, or fire vehicles. The security
toll operators are bonded under the insurance policy
applicable to the Employer's security guards, wear
distinctive uniforms and the Wackenhut badge, share
the same benefits and workweek as the security
guards, and receive the same employee manual. The
Employer regards them as being similarly responsible
for enforcing its clients' rules and regulations, in that
they are required to report and describe violations
when observed, trying by themselves to resolve such
violations if possible, but calling the police when so
required.
In light of the facts set forth above, we believe it is
clear that the security toll operators are employed as
guards to enforce against persons seeking to use the
expressway rules to protect property and the safety of
persons on the expressways premises. It is immaterial
that the operators do not themselves have the power
of police to ultimately determine and compel compli-
ance by violators of the expressway rules. Rather, it
is sufficient that they possess and exercise responsibil-
ity to observe and report infractions, as this is an
essential step in the procedure for enforcement of the
highway rules.' Likewise, it is not determinative that
this is not their only function. Although the record
does not reveal the frequency or the amount of time
devoted to this aspect of their duties as compared to
the exercise of functions more closely related to the
actual collection of tolls, it is apparent that enforce-
ment of the turnpike authority rules is a continual part
of their responsibility and is a significant portion of
the requirements of their job. In these circumstances
we find that they are guards within the meaning of
Section 9(b)(3).7
As we have found that the employees sought to be
represented are guards within the meaning of the Act,
and as the Petitioner is a labor organization which
represents employees other than guards, we further
find that the Petitioner is not qualified, under Section
9(b)(3), to represent the employees sought by its peti-
tion. Accordingly we shall dismiss the petition.
ORDER
It is hereby ordered that the petition filed herein
be, and it hereby is, dismissed.
6 West Virginia Pulp and Paper Co, 140 NLRB 1160; St Regis Paper Co.,
128 NLRB 550, 552 , Watchmanitors, Inc, 128 NLRB 903; Burns Security
Systems, Inc, 188 NLRB No. 25
7 Watchmamtors, Inc., 128 NLRB 903; Laundry Owners' Association of
Greater Cincinnati, 123 NLRB 543, 546, 547 ; International Furniture Co., 119
NLRB 1462,1465; H. N Thayer Co, 112 NLRB 792, 793, Walterboro Manu-
facturing Corp, 106 NLRB 1383, 1384.