American Courier Corp.

602 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD American Courier Corporation and Teamsters Local Union No. 25, a/w International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Help- ers of America, Petitioner. Case 1- RC-10678 July 21, 1970 DECISION ON REVIEW AND ORDER By MEMBERS FANNING, MCCULLOCH, BROWN, AND JENKINS On September 12, 1969, the Regional Director for Region I of the National Labor Relations Board issued a Decision and Direction of Election in the above-entitled case in which he found appropriate the Petitioner's requested unit limited in scope to certain employees at the Employer's Boston, Mas- sachusetts, operating location and thus rejected the Employer's contention that the unit must be coex- tensive with its New England region. Thereafter, the Employer filed a timely request for review of the Regional Director's decision in which it con- tended that in making his unit determination he de- parted from officially reported Board precedents and committed substantial errors in his findings of fact.' On January 20, 1970, the National Labor Rela- tions Board by telegraphic order granted the request for review and stayed the election pending decision on review. The Board has reviewed the entire record in this case with respect to the issues under review and makes the following findings: The Petitioner requested a unit of couriers as- signed to and operating out of the Employer's Boston location. As found by the Regional Director, the Employer is engaged in the transportation of bank instru- ments, commercial documents, and other commer- cial materials between banks and other customers. Its operations are nationwide, and its New England region, here involved, is an administrative subdivi- sion of its operations conforming generally to the geographic area of the First Federal Reserve Dls- trict2 served by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, the Employer's principal customer. Because the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston establishes deadlines at intervals throughout the day for receipt of checks and commercial papers from banks in the District to be credited to their ac- counts, the Employer is required to provide a trans- portation system to meet those deadlines. Control of the Employer's New England Region is centered at its Boston office which is under a re- gional vice president and a regional operations manager. Operations are conducted from the Boston office and from satellite locations at Wor- cester and Williamstown, Massachusetts; Hartford, Connecticut; Providence, Rhode Island; Concord, New Hampshire; and Portland, Maine. Operational offices are maintained only at Boston, Worcester, and Hartford, each of which is under an operational supervisor. Hartford also has a senior dispatcher- and two dispatchers, and Boston has two dispatchers.3 Throughout the region there are 15 senior couriers" and 249 full-time courier guards stationed at or operating out of operational loca- tions, broken down as follows: Boston, 6 senior couriers and 92 courier guards; Hartford, 2 senior couriers and 74 courier guards (included in the Hartford complement are 1 senior courier and 5 courier guards of the Williamstown location); Wor- cester, 3 senior couriers and 49 courier guards; Providence, 1 senior courier and 18 courier guards; Portland, 1 senior courier and 8 courier guards; and Concord, I senior courier and 8 courier guards. The Employer operates with a total of 47 vans and station wagons, complemented in more remote locations by private automobiles. It garages and ser- vices 24 of its vehicles at the Boston location. The rest are garaged and serviced at other locations under separate contracts. The parties agreed to in- clude in any unit found appropriate the two mechanics and a mechanics' helper at the Boston location. The courier guards travel a network of intercon- necting routes in the five state region serviced by the Employer. At relay points in the system courier guards meet to exchange material. In this manner the Employer maintains a smooth flow of materials to and from the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and other banks in the District geared to meet the established deadlines.' All payroll and personnel records for the region are maintained at the Boston office There, all labor relations and operational policies are set, superviso- ry meetings are periodically held, and recommen- ' The Employer filed a supplemental statement in support of its request for review in which it asserted the existence of a conflict between Regional Director's decision herein and the decision of the Regional Director for Re- gion 18 in American Courier Corp , I8-RC-8035, issued September 30, 1969 ' The District encompasses all of the New England States except a small part of Connecticut The Employer does not service Vermont because it does not have an Interstate Commerce Commission license to operate in that State The dispatchers are stipulated to be supervisors ° The Regional Director found, contrary to the Petitioner's contention that senior couriers are supervisors as defined in the Act 5 From time to time courier guards assigned to other locations will make runs to the Boston office While there they are under that location's super- vision and they may be assigned to make short runs in the Boston metropolitan area 184 NLRB No. 61 AMERICAN COURIER CORP. 603 dations for hire and discharge are submitted for ap- proval. All courier guards in the region perform the same duties, wear the same uniforms, are paid ac- cording to the same scale, receive the same benefits, have the same working conditions, and work under the same general rules. Upon the foregoing and our review of the entire record, we find that the unit sought by the Peti- tioner is too narrow in scope to constitute an ap- propriate unit. In view of the high degree of in- tegration in the Employer's operations required by the deadlines set by the Federal Reserve Board of Boston, the frequent contacts between courier guards at relay points in the Employer's transporta- tion system, the common policies and overlapping supervision under which the courier guards perform their duties, we conclude that the courier guards throughout the region share such a close communi- ty of interest that only a unit coextensive with the New England Region is appropriate. However, as the Petitioner indicated at the hearing that it did not wish to participate in an election in such a unit, we shall dismiss the petition herein. ORDER It is hereby ordered that the petition be, and it hereby is, dismissed.