TRANSIT CONNECTION INC.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Oct 25, 2017

365 NLRB No. 143 (N.L.R.B. 2017)

365 NLRB No. 143
NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
bound volumes of NLRB decisions. Readers are requested to notify the Ex-
ecutive Secretary, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C.
20570, of any typographical or other formal errors so that corrections can
be included in the bound volumes.
Transit Connection, Inc. and Amalgamated Transit
Union Local 1548. Case 01–CA–179805
October 25, 2017
DECISION AND ORDER
BY CHAIRMAN MISCIMARRA AND MEMBERS PEARCE
AND KAPLAN
The General Counsel seeks summary judgment in this
case on the grounds that there are no genuine issues of
material fact as to the allegations in the complaint, and
that the Board should find, as a matter of law, that the
Respondent failed and refused to bargain with the Union
in violation of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act by fail-
ing and refusing to respond to the Union’s requests for
information that is necessary and relevant to the Union’s
performance of its duties as the exclusive collective-
bargaining representative of a unit of the Respondent’s
employees, and by failing to furnish the information.
Pursuant to a charge and an amended charge filed on
July 8 and August 30, 2016,1 respectively, by Amalga-
mated Transit Union Local 1548 (the Union), the Gen-
eral Counsel issued a complaint on October 31, alleging
that the Respondent has violated Section 8(a)(5) and (1)
of the Act by failing and refusing to respond to the Un-
ion’s information requests and to furnish the requested
information. The Respondent filed an answer admitting
in part and denying in part the allegations in the com-
plaint.
On December 28, the Board issued a Decision and Or-
der granting the General Counsel’s Motion for Summary
Judgment in a related refusal-to-bargain case in which
the Respondent contested the Union’s certification in
Case 01–RC–145728 as bargaining representative of the
employee unit at issue in this proceeding. Transit Con-
nection, Inc., 365 NLRB No. 9 (2016) (Transit I). In that
case, the Board found that since August 9 the Respond-
ent had failed and refused to recognize and bargain with
the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining repre-
sentative of the employees in violation of Section 8(a)(5)
and (1) of the Act. Id.
On March 21, 2017, the General Counsel filed a Mo-
tion to Transfer Case to the Board and for Summary
Judgment in the current proceeding. On June 5, 2017,
the Board issued an order transferring the proceeding to
the Board and a Notice to Show Cause why the motion

1 All subsequent dates are in 2016, unless otherwise indicated.
should not be granted. Thereafter, the Respondent filed a
response to the Board’s Notice to Show Cause.
The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its
authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
Ruling on Motion for Summary Judgment
At paragraph 10 of the complaint, the General Counsel
alleges that, by letters dated May 17 and 24, August 9,
and September 9, the Union requested the following in-
formation from the Respondent:
1) A list of current employees with the following in-
formation:
a. His or her name;
b. Last known address, telephone numbers and
email address;
c. Date of hire and seniority date if different;
d. Rate of pay;
e. Job classification;
f. Number of hours employee is scheduled to
work per week;
g. Current work schedule;
h. Whether employee participates in available in-
surance programs and the coverage he or she elected
(e.g. employee, employee plus one, family);
i. Monthly employer contribution to employees’
pension and/or tax deferred savings accounts for
previous three months; and
j. Monthly employee contribution to employees’
pension and/or tax deferred savings accounts for
previous three months.
2) A copy of all current employee handbooks,
and any changes or modification thereto from the
previous twenty-four months.
3) A copy of all current job descriptions and any
changes or modification thereto from the previous
twenty-four months.
4) A copy of the plan document, summary plan
description, Form 5500 and any contract with all in-
surance providers for any health, dental or vision
plans.
5) A cost breakdown of the health, dental and vi-
sion plans, including the premiums paid by the com-
pany and by the employees for the different levels of
coverage (i.e. employee, employee plus one, family).
6) A copy of plan document, summary plan de-
scription, Form 5500, and the total employer contri-
butions to pension and/or tax deferred savings plans
over the prior three years.
7) A copy of any life insurance plan, and the em-
ployer’s monthly premium per employee.
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD2
8) A copy of any accidental death and dismem-
berment plan, and the employer’s monthly premium
per employee.
9) A copy of any disability insurance plan, and
the employer’s monthly premium per employee.
10) A copy of all wage scales or policies on wage
rates including, but not limited to, policies regarding
starting rates, raises and/or step increases, top rates,
overtime pay and shift differentials.
11) A copy of all incentive and bonus plans
whether applied to all or only certain employees.
12) A copy of all policies related to leave includ-
ing, but not limited to, those regarding vacations,
vacation picks, paid holidays, paid sick leave, pater-
nal leave, paid and unpaid personal leave, bereave-
ment leave, and family and medical leave.
13) A copy of all existing benefit plans including,
but not limited to, those regarding child care, health
and other flexible spending accounts, and training
and tuition reimbursement benefits.
14) A copy of all current employee policies, in-
cluding, but not limited to, those regarding attend-
ance, discipline, accidents and surveillance such as
drive cams.
15) A copy of all current policies regarding job,
shift, and route and/or run bidding and picks.
16) Copies of all disciplinary notices, warnings
or records of disciplinary personnel actions for the
last twelve months.2
Complaint paragraph 11 alleges that the information
described in paragraph 10 “is necessary for, and relevant
to, the Union’s performance of its duties as the exclusive
collective-bargaining representative of the Unit.” At
complaint paragraph 12, the General Counsel alleges that
“[s]ince about May 17 and 24, August 9, and September
9, 2016, Respondent has failed and refused to respond to
the information requests described above in paragraph 10
and to furnish the Union with the information requested
by it as described above in paragraph 10.” Complaint
paragraph 13 alleges that by the above conduct the Re-
spondent has refused to bargain in violation of Section
8(a)(5) and (1) of the Act.
In its answer, the Respondent states that it “denies the
allegation contained in Paragraph 12 of the complaint
that the Respondent has been failing and refusing to bar-
gain collectively and in good faith with the Union since
May 17, 2016.” It also denies that it has unlawfully re-

2 The General Counsel’s motion states that the failure to provide
item 17 of the request for information (“a copy of the current revenue
agreements and all modifications thereto for the services operated by
the employees”) is not alleged in the complaint.
fused to bargain. In its response to the show-cause no-
tice, however, the Respondent makes clear that its only
factual dispute with the complaint’s allegations is based
on a claim that it did not receive requests for information
dated May 17 and 24. The Respondent admits that it
received the information request dated August 9 and does
not deny that it received the information request dated
September 9. And while its answer to the complaint
states that it “is without sufficient knowledge to admit or
deny the allegations” in paragraph 11 that the requested
information “is necessary for, and relevant to, the Un-
ion’s performance of its duties” as the bargaining unit’s
exclusive representative, it is well established that the
type of information the Union requested, concerning the
terms and conditions of employment of unit employees,
is presumptively relevant for purposes of collective bar-
gaining and must be furnished on request. See, e.g.,
Metro Health Foundation, Inc., 338 NLRB 802, 803
(2003). The Respondent has not asserted any basis for
rebutting the presumptive relevance of this information.
Rather, the Respondent explains in its response to the
show-cause notice that its refusal to provide the infor-
mation requested on and after August 9 is necessarily
part of its overall refusal to bargain in order to test the
Union’s certification in the Transit I proceeding, which
is pending review before the United States Court of Ap-
peals for the Eleventh Circuit.
Based on the foregoing, we find that there are no mate-
rial issues of fact regarding the complaint’s allegations
that warrant a hearing. Accordingly, we grant the Gen-
eral Counsel’s Motion for Summary Judgment.
On the entire record, the Board makes the following
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. JURISDICTION
At all material times, the Respondent, a corporation with an
office and place of business located at 11 A Street, Ed-
gartown, Massachusetts (the Edgartown facility), has been
engaged, pursuant to an agreement with The Martha’s
Vineyard Regional Transit Authority (the Authority), as the
transit operator for the Authority along such routes and ac-
cording to such schedules as defined by the Authority on the
island of Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts.
Annually, the Respondent, in conducting its operations
described above, provides bus transportation services to
the Authority and the public valued in excess of
$250,000 on the island of Martha’s Vineyard. The Au-
thority is a component unit of the Massachusetts De-
partment of Transportation, which is a component unit of
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, which is directly
engaged in interstate commerce.
TRANSIT CONNECTION, INC. 3
We find that the Respondent is an employer engaged
in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and
(7) of the Act. We further find that the Union is a labor
organization within the meaning of Section 2(5) of the
Act.3
II. ALLEGED UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
The following employees of the Respondent (the unit)
constitute a unit appropriate for purposes of collective
bargaining within the meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:
All full-time and regular part-time operators employed
by the Respondent at its 11 A Street, Edgartown, Mas-
sachusetts facility but excluding office clerical employ-
ees, managerial employees, dispatchers, mechanics,
confidential employees, seasonal employees, guards
and supervisors as defined in the Act, and all other em-
ployees.
On March 15, the Board certified the Union as the ex-
clusive collective-bargaining representative of the unit.
At all times since March 15, based on Section 9(a) of the
Act, the Union has been the exclusive collective-
bargaining representative of the unit.
By letters dated August 9 and September 9, the Union
requested that the Respondent furnish information to the
Union that is relevant and necessary to the performance
of its duties as the exclusive collective-bargaining repre-
sentative of the unit. Since about August 9, the Re-
spondent has failed and refused to respond to the infor-
mation requests.4 We find that the Respondent’s conduct
constitutes an unlawful refusal to bargain collectively
with the Union in violation of Section 8(a)(5) and (1) of
the Act.
CONCLUSION OF LAW
By failing and refusing since August 9 to respond to
the Union’s requests for information that is necessary
and relevant to the Union’s performance of its duties as

3 The Respondent states in its answer that it “is without sufficient
knowledge to admit or deny” the complaint allegation that the Union is
a labor organization within the meaning of Sec. 2(5) of the Act. The
Respondent made the same statement in answer to the complaint in
Transit I. The Board found there that the Union was a labor organiza-
tion, noting that the Respondent had stipulated to the Union’s labor
organization status in the underlying representation proceeding. For the
same reasons, we find here that the Union is a labor organization within
the meaning of Sec. 2(5) of the Act.
4 As noted above, the Respondent denies receiving the Union’s May
17 and 24 requests, but specifically admits receiving the August 9
request and does not deny receiving the September 9 request. Because
the date on which the Respondent first received the Union’s request for
information does not affect the remedy, we rely on the uncontested
facts that the Respondent received the August 9 and September 9 re-
quests, which included all of the requested information described in
par. 10 of the complaint. See Transit I, supra slip op. at 2 fn. 3.
the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the
appropriate unit, and by failing to furnish the infor-
mation, the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor prac-
tices affecting commerce within the meaning of Section
8(a)(5) and (1) and Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.
REMEDY
Having found that the Respondent has engaged in cer-
tain unfair labor practices, we shall order it to cease and
desist and to take certain affirmative action designed to
effectuate the policies of the Act. Specifically, having
found that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(5) and
(1) of the Act by failing to provide the Union with in-
formation that is relevant and necessary to the Union’s
performance of its functions as the collective-bargaining
representative of the Respondent’s unit employees, we
shall order the Respondent to furnish the Union with the
information requested on August 9 and September 9,
2016, with the exception of item 17 in each letter.
ORDER
The National Labor Relations Board orders that the
Respondent, Transit Connection, Inc., Edgartown, Mas-
sachusetts, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns,
shall
1. Cease and desist from
(a) Refusing to bargain collectively with Amalgamat-
ed Transit Union Local 1548 (the Union) by failing and
refusing to furnish it with requested information that is
relevant and necessary to the Union’s performance of its
functions as the exclusive collective-bargaining repre-
sentative of the Respondent’s unit employees.
(b) In any like or related manner interfering with, re-
straining, or coercing employees in the exercise of the
rights guaranteed them by Section 7 of the Act.
2. Take the following affirmative action necessary to
effectuate the policies of the Act.
(a) Furnish to the Union in a timely manner the infor-
mation requested by the Union on August 9 and Septem-
ber 9, 2016, with the exception of item 17 in each letter.
(b) Within 14 days after service by the Region, post at
its facility in Edgartown, Massachusetts, copies of the
attached notice marked “Appendix.”5 Copies of the no-
tice, on forms provided by the Regional Director for Re-
gion 1, after being signed by the Respondent's authorized
representative, shall be posted by the Respondent and
maintained for 60 consecutive days in conspicuous plac-
es, including all places where notices to employees are

5 If this Order is enforced by a judgment of a United States court of
appeals, the words in the notice reading “Posted by Order of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board” shall read “Posted Pursuant to a Judg-
ment of the United States Court of Appeals Enforcing an Order of the
National Labor Relations Board.”
DECISIONS OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD4
customarily posted. In addition to physical posting of
paper notices, notices shall be distributed electronically,
such as by email, posting on an intranet or an internet
site, and/or other electronic means, if the Respondent
customarily communicates with its employees by such
means. Reasonable steps shall be taken by the Respond-
ent to ensure that the notices are not altered, defaced, or
covered by any other material. If the Respondent has
gone out of business or closed the facility involved in
these proceedings, the Respondent shall duplicate and
mail, at its own expense, a copy of the notice to all cur-
rent employees and former employees employed by the
Respondent at any time since August 9, 2016.
(c) Within 21 days after service by the Region, file
with the Regional Director for Region 1 a sworn certifi-
cation of a responsible official on a form provided by the
Region attesting to the steps that the Respondent has
taken to comply.
Dated, Washington, D.C. October 25, 2017
______________________________________
Philip A. Miscimarra, Chairman
______________________________________
Mark Gaston Pearce, Member
______________________________________
Marvin E. Kaplan, Member
(SEAL) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX
NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES
POSTED BY ORDER OF THE
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
An Agency of the United States Government
The National Labor Relations Board has found that we vio-
lated Federal labor law and has ordered us to post and obey
this notice.
FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO
Form, join, or assist a union
Choose representatives to bargain with us on
your behalf
Act together with other employees for your bene-
fit and protection
Choose not to engage in any of these protected
activities.
WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively with
Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1548 (the Union) by
failing and refusing to furnish it with requested infor-
mation that is relevant and necessary to the Union’s per-
formance of its functions as the exclusive collective-
bargaining representative of our unit employees.
WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere
with, restrain, or coerce you in the exercise of the rights
listed above.
WE WILL furnish to the Union in a timely manner the
information requested by the Union on August 9 and
September 9, 2016, with the exception of item 17 in each
letter.
TRANSIT CONNECTION, INC.
The Board’s decision can be found at
https://www.nlrb.gov/case/01–CA–179805 or by using the
QR code below. Alternatively, you can obtain a copy of the
decision from the Executive Secretary, National Labor Re-
lations Board, 1015 Half Street, S.E., Washington, D.C.
20570, or by calling (202) 273-1940.