Greyhound Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Nov 2, 1951

96 N.L.R.B. 1328 (N.L.R.B. 1951)

1328 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
guaranteed by the Act, it will also be recommended, in order to make effective-
the interdependent guarantees of Section 7 of the Act, that Respondents cease
and desist from in any manner infringing upon the rights guaranteed in Section
7 of the Act.
Upon the basis of the above findings of fact, and upon the entire record in
the case, the undersigned makes the following :
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
4. Local 3605, United Steel Workers of America, CIO, is a labor organization
within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.
2. All production and maintenance employees of Cross employed at its Jaffrey,.
New Hampshire, plant, exclusive of executives, foremen, working foremen,
tack makers, scalers, watchmen, guards, office and clerical employees, and all
supervisors as defined in Section 2 (11) of the Act, constitute a unit appropriate
for the purpose of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b)
of the Act.
3. Local 3605, United Steel Workers of America, CIO, was at all times material
herein, and now is, the exclusive representative of all employees in the afore-
said appropriate unit for the purpose of collective bargaining within the meaning.
of Section 9 (a) of the Act.
4. By discriminating in regard to the tenure of employment and the terms
or conditions of employment of Raymond Sebastian because of his participation
in the 13-week strike commencing in January 1946, thereby discouraging mem-
bership in the Union, Respondents have engaged in and are engaging in unfair
labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (3) of the Act.
5. By the acts afore-mentioned, Respondents have interfered with, restrained,
and coerced their employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section
7 of the Act, and have engaged in and are engaging in unfair labor practices
within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (1) of the Act.
6. By refusing to bargain collectively on the policy and method of distributing
bonuses Respondents Cross, United, and Brown have engaged in and are engaging
in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (5) of the Act.
7. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act.
[Recommended Order omitted from publication in this volume.]
GREAT LAKES GREYHOUND LINES, DIVISION OF THE GREYHOUND COR-
PORATION and OFFICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, LOCAL
No. 42, AFL, PETITIONER . Case No. 7-RC-1453. November 2,
1951
Decision and Order
Upon a petition duly filed under Section 9 (c) of the National
Labor Relations Act, a hearing was held before William M. Otter,
hearing officer. The hearing officer's rulings made at the hearing
are free from prejudicial error and are hereby affirmed.
96 NLRB No. 196.
GREAT LAKES GREYHOUND LINES 1329
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the Act , the Board
has delegated its powers in connection with this case to a three-
member panel [Chairman Herzog and Members Houston and
Murdock].
Upon the entire record in this case , the Board finds :
1. The Employer is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the
Act.
2. The labor organization involved claims to represent employees
of the Employer.
3. No 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, for the following
reasons:
The Petitioner seeks to represent a unit of all dispatchers and chief
dispatchers at the Employer's terminals located in Detroit, Wyan-
dotte, Birmingham , and Mt. Clemens, Michigan . The Employer con-
tends that its dispatchers and chief dispatchers are supervisors and
therefore are not employees within the meaning of the Act 1
The functions of the dispatchers and chief dispatchers are similar,
-except that the latter have additional clerical duties. Dispatchers
assign drivers to busses in accordance with the provisions of the labor
contract , dispatch busses in accordance with the regular operating
.schedule , and keep records incident to these duties. They may in
their discretion vary the operating schedule to meet emergency situa-
tions. It is their responsibility to see that the drivers observe State
and Federal laws and company regulations . Several of the Employ-
er's witnesses testified that dispatchers have the authority , which they
frequently exercise, effectively to recommend the discipline of bus
drivers. In view of this undisputed testimony , we find that the dis-
patchers and chief dispatchers are supervisors as defined in Section
2 (11) of the Act 2 As supervisors are excluded from the Act's cov-
erage, we shall dismiss the petition.
Order
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition filed herein be, and it hereby
is, dismissed.
1 In view of our finding on this question , it is unnecessary to rule on the issue regarding
the scope of the unit.
2 Seashore Transportation Company, 95 NLRB 1296.