Gate City Transit Lines, Inc.

In the Matter of GATE Crrr TRANSIT LINES, INC.' and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS , CHAUFFEURS , WAREHOUSEMEN AND HELPERS OF AMERICA, LOCAL No. 391, A. F. L. Case No. 34-RC-51.-Decided January 10, 1949 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed, a hearing was held before a hearing officer of the National Labor Relations Board. 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 National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-man panel consisting of the undersigned Board Members.* Upon the entire record in this case, the Board finds: 1. The Employer is engaged in the transportation of passengers by motor bus between Greensboro, North Carolina, a city of about 80,000 population, and its surrounding suburban and rural areas. The Em- ployer owns 14 buses, all of which are used on regularly scheduled routes for which the Employer has been certificated by the North Caro- lina Utilities Commission. During 1947, the total revenue from passenger transportation was approximately $146,000, and for the first 5 months of 1948, approximately $63,000. In 1947, the Employer purchased 3 buses from a South Carolina dealer for over $13,000, and gasoline, tires, oil and grease from North Carolina dealers for about $30,000. These latter items originated from States other than North Carolina. I The Employer ' s name appears as amended at the hearing . The Employer is a North Carolina corporation organized on January 1, 1948. Between October 1944 and January 1, 1948, the business was conducted as a sole proprietorship by L. F. Barnard , who became president of the corporation . The change from proprietorship to corporation did not affect operations or the direction of the enterprise . As used in this Decision , the term "Employer" refers either to the proprietorship or the present corporation , depending on the years involved. *Chairman Herzog and Members Reynolds and Gray. 81 N. L. R. B., No. 15. 79 so DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD The Employer has no established stops, but picks up and discharges passengers anywhere along its routes. In Greensboro or its im- mediate environs, its buses pass directly by, or within a few blocks of, a number of large textile manufacturing plants, and also a Sears Roebuck warehouse. Although there are other local bus transportation companies in Greensboro, the Employer serves its suburban and rural routes either exclusively or more frequently than its competitors. Testimony at the hearing established that among other passengers transported by the Employer, there are some employees at plants en- gaged in commerce who use the Employer's buses for transportation to and from work. One route has a stop at the airport. On these facts, we find, contrary to the Employer's contention, that the Employer is engaged in activities affecting commerce within the meaning of the Act. The Employer's motion to dismiss on the above basis is hereby denied.2 2. The labor organization named below claims to represent 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 all regular and relief bus drivers. The Employer urges that the two dispatchers, and the garage me- chanic and his helper be included in the unit. The dispatchers maintain schedules by seeing that bus drivers report and leave on time. They may call the attention of their supervisor to a bus driver's failure to abide by his schedule, but they cannot make or recommend changes in status of the drivers. The drivers and dispatchers are supervised by the same person. We find that their work is closely related, and that their interests are similar. We shall therefore include the dispatchers in the unit. The mechanic and his helper work in the Employer's garage, three or four blocks from the Employer's bus terminal in Greensboro. The mechanic is paid substantially more than the drivers. He and his helper are supervised by a supervisor other than the one responsible for actual operation of the buses. There is no interchange of work between the drivers and the garage workers, except that the mechanic may, in an emergency, bring a bus back to the garage after it has broken down on the read. There has been no past bargaining history with respect to the Em- ployer's operations. Because of the separate supervision of drivers 2 Matter of Catty Transportation Company , 80 N L R. B 270. Matter of El Paso- Ysleta Bus Company, Incorporated, 79 N L R B. 1068, Matter of dmartilo Bus Company, 78 N L R B 1103 GATE CITY TRANSIT LINES, INC. 81 and garage workers, the absence of any substantial interchange of duties or close working relationships, we believe that the mechanic and his helper should not be included in the unit. We find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act: All regular and relief bus drivers and dispatchers, excluding garage mechanics and helpers, office and clerical employees, and supervisors as defined by the Act. DIRECTION OF ELECTION As part of the investigation to ascertain representatives for the pur- poses of collective bargaining with the Employer, an election by secret ballot shall be conducted as early as possible, but not later than 30 days from the date of this Direction, under the direction and super- vision of the Regional Director for the Region in which this case was heard, and subject to Sections 203.61 and 203.62 of National Labor Re- lations Board Rules and Regulations-Series 5, as amended, among the employees in the unit found appropriate in paragraph numbered 4, above, who were employed during the pay-roll period immediately preceding the date of this Direction of Election, including employees who did not work during said pay-roll period because they were ill or on vacation or temporarily laid off, but excluding those employees who have since quit or been discharged for cause and have not been rehired or reinstated prior to the date of the election, and also excluding em- ployees on strike who are not entitled to reinstatement, to determine whether or not they desire to be represented by International Brother- hood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Local No. 391, A. F. L., for the purposes of collective bargaining.