St. Louis Public Service Co.

In the Matter of ST. Louis PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY, EMPLOYER and AUTO,IIOTIVE LODGE No. 777, DISTRICT No. 9, INTERNATIONAL ASSO- CIATION OF MACHINISTS, PETITIONER Case No. 14-R-1699.Decided December 29, 1941 Messrs . Gaylord C. Burke and Nelson TT'. Hartman, both of St. Louis , Mo., for the Employer. Mr. Lester C. Asher, of Chicago,. Ill., and Mr. W. C. Riley, of St. Louis, Mo., for the Petitioner. ' Mr. O. David Zimring, by !Messrs . Bernard Cushman and H. J_ Lehmann, of Chicago , Ill., and Mr. A. E. East, of St. Louis, Mo., for the Amalgamated. Mr. A. J. Eberhardy, of Chicago , Ill., and Mr. H. H. Camp, of St. Louis, Mo., for the Blacksmiths. Messrs. Ed. Rademeier and Henry C. Kuehner, both of St. Louis, Mo., for the Electricians. DECISION AND ORDER Upon a petition duly filed, hearing in this case was held at St. Louis, Missouri, on May 28 and 29, and June 11 and 12, 1947, before Harry C. Carlson, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed? Upon the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT 1. THE BUSINESS OF THE EMPLOYER St. Louis Public Service Company, a Missouri corporation with principal offices at St. Louis, Missouri, operates a city transit system m At the hearing , the Employer and the Amalgamated separately moved to dismiss the petition on various grounds As indicated in Section III, infma, we are dismissing the petition on the ground that the requested unit is inappropriate Accordingly , all other grounds aye preternutted On October 23, 1947 , the Board received from the Intemvenor a motion to consolidate the instant case with Case No 14-RC-37 , initiated by' its petition of October 1947 , and involving emploiees at the Employer 's operation , and to remand the instant case to the Fourteenth Region for fm them hearing This motion is hei eby denied 75 N L R. B., No Si. 693 694 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD carrying passengers over fixed routes by motor bus and street car in the city of St. Louis, Missouri, and in adjacent areas in St. Louis County. Passengers employed by companies engaged in interstate commerce use the Employer's system in going to and from industrial areas. At the time of the hearing, the Employer operated 676 street cars and 1,076 busses over about 27 street car lines and 31 bus lines, serving an area of 120 square miles. During the year 1945, the Employer's operating revenues were about $26,000,000. During the same period, it pur- chased materials and supplies valued at about $1,587,000, of which approximately 90 percent originated outside the State of Missouri.2 We find, contrary to the contention of the Employer, that it is en- gaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act.3 H. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED 4 The Petitioner 5 is a labor organization, claiming to represent em- ployees of the Employer. Amalgamated Association of Street, Electric Railway & Motor Coach Employees of America, Local 788, herein called the Amalga- mated, is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, claiming to represent employees of the Employer. III. THE ALLEGED APPROPRIATE UNIT The Petitioner seeks a unit of the skilled automotive (bus) mechanics of the Employer's city transit system which operates both street cats and motor busses; it would exclude therefrom skilled rail (street car) mechanics as well as certain less skilled maintenance employees work- ing on both busses and street cars, who together with the automotive mechanics comprise the bulk of the Employer's equipment department. The unit sought is almost identical with the one requested by the same Petitioner in a prior proceeding involving the same Employer, but which was found inappropriate by the Boards The Employer and the Intervenor both contend, as they did in the earlier case, that the 2 With the exception of the number of street cars and busses operated by the Employer, the facts -,with respect to its business were adduced in Case No 14-R-1411 , incorporated herein by reference . The record in the instant case does not contain more recent data. 3 Matter of St. Loins Public Service Company, 71 N. L R B 160 4International Brotherhood of Blacksmiths , Forgers & Helpers , AFL, and International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 1 , AFL, both intervened in the instant proceeding to protect their interest in certain employees of the Employer . When it appealed that neither the Petitioner nor the Amalgamated claimed, for the purposes of the instant case, to represent such employees , the two organizations withdrew from the proceeding , 6 The name of the Petitioner appears in the caption as amended at the hearing 6 See footnote 3, supra. , ST. LOUIS PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY 695 requested unit is arbitrarily restricted and hence inappropriate for collective bargaining purposes. The Petitioner argues that, contrary to the Board's prior holding, the automotive mechanics, including repairmen, are clearly distin- guishable from the street car mechanics, including repairmen, whom it wishes to exclude from any unit; and that the f'rmer constitute a true craft group within the meaning of the original Act and the amended Act. In this connection, the Petitioner contends, in effect, that automotive mechanics are comparative newcomers to the craft family. The Employer, on the other hand, relies heavily on the factors which the Board found controlling in making its prior deter- mination, pointing out that there has been no change in the duties of the employees involved and alleging that the proposed unit is wholly artificial, inasmuch as the Employer's equipment department con- stitutes a single, integrated operation. The Intervenor emphasizes, in addition, that there appears to be a close relationship between the street car and the bus repair employees, and that the Petitioner has organized other occupational groups of the Employer and other com- panies, and hence cannot be considered a craft organization. We are of the opinion that the record fails to establish the appro- priateness of the requested unit. In the prior proceeding we said : A consideration of the wide gamut of skills and specialties en- compassed in the term "automotive mechanic" indicates that the unit which the IAM requests more nearly corresponds to a re- stricted departmental unit than to a craft unit. It is also evident that rail and automotive maintenance work is not performed in exclusive unrelated compartments, and that equipment depart- ment workers, whether denoted rail or automotive employees by virtue of their place of employment, are not thereby isolated from each other either occupationally or economically. The skills of the rail mechanics are in many instances not notably different from the skills of the automotive mechanics. Transfers from the rail shop to the automotive shop on a voluntary basis are not un- common, and transfers of workers as a result of transition from street car to bus transportation emphasize the strong bond of common interest among all workers in the equipment department. All are confronted with identical wages, hours, and working con- ditions problems. (Footnotes omitted.) Since our prior Decision, there has indeed been no material change in the Employer's operations or in the employment conditions of 1696 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD the workers sought to be represented by the Petitioner.' The equip- ment department, comprising both automotive and rail sections, is now, as it was then, a closely knit, integrated operation. Both sections in the main shop utilize the same paint and upholstery shop, the same fare box repair unit, the sane machine, welding, and steel shops. The various employees of the equipment department have similar working conditions and privileges, and utilize similar, if not identical, tools and skills. And there continue to be personnel transfers from the rail to the automotive section." Accordingly, we are persuaded that the instant record reemphazies our previous conclusion that the automotive maintenance mechanics and the rail mechanics are inextricably part of the equipment depart- ment, and that to separate the automotive mechanics in the absence of any showing of distinguishable skills and aptitudes or of any com- pelling proof of separate functional coherence and identity, would be artificial and improper. We shall, therefore, dismiss the petition on the ground that the unit sought is inappropriate. ORDER Upon the basis of the above findings of fact, and the entire record in the case, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the petition for an investigation and certification of representatives of employees of St. Louis Public Service Company, St. Louis, Missouri, filed by Automotive Lodge 777, District No. 9, International Associa- tion of Machinists, be, and it hereby is, dismissed. It is true , as the Petitioner alleges. that the transition from street cars to busses has not been as extensive of as rapid as contemplated at the time of the hearing in the prior case Nor has the Employer established a single cleaning room in its equipment depart- ment to serve both bus and stieet car iepaii operations These factors, however, do not de- tract from our decision heiein 8 The Petitioner claimed, however, that the Employee has failed to transfer a substantial number of rail employees to the automotive division , as contemplated at the time of the hearing in the earlier case