Overnite Transportation Co.

OVERNITE TRANSPORTATION COMPANY 723 Overnite Transportation Company and Truck Drivers and Help- ers Local Union No. 728, affiliated with the International Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America, Petitioner. Case No. 10-RC-4625. August 19, 1960 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before W. Jackson Jones, hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing are free from prejudicial error and are affirmed. Pursuant to Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three- member panel [Chairman Leedom and Members Bean and Jenkins]. Upon the entire record, the Board finds : 1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the Act. 2. The labor organization named below claims to represent certain employees of the Employer. 3. A question affecting commerce exists concerning the representa- tion of certain employees of the Employer within the meaning of Section 9 (c) (1) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 4. The parties agree that a unit comprised of the city drivers and helpers, warehousemen, and checkers at the Employer's Atlanta, Georgia, terminal is appropriate, except that the Employer would also include, and the Petitioner exclude, "local" and over-the-road drivers, O.S.D. employees, and certain employees who Petitioner contends are supervisors. We include in the unit the "local" ("peddle-run") and over-the- road drivers whose unit placement is in dispute and who are not sought separately by another labor organization, as we find that their interests are sufficiently related to those of the other drivers and employees to warrant their inclusion in the unit.' We exclude from the unit the O.S.D. employees who perform various types of office work and other work connected with straightening out claims made against the Employer for shortages, overages, and damaged goods, as we find that their interests are different from those of the em- ployees in the unit .2 We resolve as follows the parties' further dispute as to the super- visory status of the employees named below : Dispatchers Jones and Chastain, the city and "local" dispatchers, relay instructions by radio to drivers working in fixed areas. As it does not appear that they have or exercise any supervisory authority, and as they have sufficient 1 See Mead-Atlanta Paper Company, 123 NLRB 306. 2 See Standard Trucking Company, 122 NLRB 761, 762. 128 NLRB No. 89. 724 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD interests in common with the employees sought, we include them.' Dispatcher Lee, the over-the-road dispatcher, works primarily at night, makes independent choices in assigning work to 13 over-the- road drivers, may excuse drivers who request time off, and admittedly possesses more authority than the other dispatchers. On these facts, we find that Lee responsibly directs the work of the over-the-road drivers, and we exclude him from the Unit .4 Night Warehouse Fore- man Chester is in sole charge of the operations of the warehouse and of 10 to 22 employees between 9 p.m. and 6 a.m. He does no manual work and can discipline employees for insubordination and other in- fractions. We find that he is a supervisor and we exclude him from the unit. Assistant to the Day Warehouse Foreman, Martin, helps direct the operations of the warehouse and, further, works "a little different" hours than his superior. As we cannot determine on this record if his direction of the work of others is "responsible" direc- tion or if he is regularly in charge at times when no foremen are present, we permit him to vote subject to challenge. We need not resolve the alleged supervisory status of Simmons, who is excluded above as an O.S.D. department employee. The parties agree to include in the unit the garage service employees who, as the Petitioner pointed out, were expressly included by the Board in a 1954 decision, Case No. 10-RC-2788 (unpublished). How- ever, that decision was revoked and, although an election was subse- quently held pursuant to a consent agreement, no bargaining history resulted. On the record now before us, we find no reason to depart from our usual policy of excluding garage employees from a terminal unit 5 Accordingly, and as the parties agree to exclude the garage mechanics and helper whose interests are closely allied with those of the garage service employees, we shall, notwithstanding the agree- ment of the parties to include them, exclude the garage service em- ployees from the unit. Accordingly, we find that the following employees of the Employer constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within Section 9 (b) of the Act : All drivers, warehousemen, helpers, and checkers at the Employer's Atlanta, Georgia, terminal, including the city drivers, "local" and over-the-road drivers, and the city and local dispatchers, excluding the O.S.D. employees and all office clerical employees; the garage service employees and the garage mechanics and helper; guards and watchmen; the over-the-road dispatcher, the night warehouse fore- man, and all other supervisors as defined in the Act; and all other employees. [Text of Direction of Election omitted from publication.] 3 Standard Trucking Company, supra, at 763. A See Fredrickson Motor Express Corporation, 121 NLRB 32, 34-35. 6 Helms Motor Express, Inc., 107 NLRB 132, 134.