Orleans Transportation Service, Inc.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 21, 1975

217 N.L.R.B. 483 (N.L.R.B. 1975)

ORLEANS TRANSPORTATION SERVICE, INC.
Orleans Transportation Service, Inc. andBrotherhood
of Railway, Airline & -Steamship Clerks, Freight
Handlers, Express & Station Employees,
AFL-CIO, Petitioner . Case 15-RC-5507
April 21, 1975
DECISION ON REVIEW
BY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND PENELLO
On September 20, 1974, the Regional Director for
Region 15 issued a Decision and Direction of Election
in the above-entitled proceeding in which he broadened
the Petitioner's requested unit of the Employer' s limou-
sine drivers and tour guides to include reservation
clerks and he excluded, inter alia, dispatchers and ramp
supervisors, rejecting the Employer's contention that
they share such a close community of interest with the
requested employees as to require their inclusion. Hav-
ing excluded the dispatchers and ramp supervisors on
community-of-interest grounds, he found it unneces-
sary to reach the Petitioner's contentions that the for-
mer are supervisors and the latter are either supervisors
or guards. Thereafter, in accordance with Section
102.67 of the National Labor Relations Board Rules
and Regulations, Series 8, as amended, the Employer
filed a timely request for review of the Regional Direc-
tor's decision on the grounds that, in excluding the
dispatchers and ramp supervisors from the unit, he
made findings of fact which are clearly erroneous and
he departed from precedent.
On October 30, 1974, the National Labor Relations
Board, by telegraphic order, granted the Employer's
request for review and stayed the election pending deci-
sion on review.
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the
National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board has delegated its au-
thority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.
The Board has considered the entire record in this
case with respect to the issues under review and makes
the following findings:
The Employer contends that the record does not
support the Petitioner's argument that the ramp super-
visors and dispatchers fall within the statutory defini-
tion of supervisors or that the former are guards, and
its disputes the Regional Director's conclusion that
these two categories of employees do not have such a
close community of interest to require their inclusion
in the unit. We agree with the Employer's contentions.
The Employer, a Louisiana corporation, provides
limousine transportation service between the New Or-
leans, Louisiana, airport and various downtown New
Orleans hotels, and its conducts sightseeing tours in
and around the New Orleans area . It employs, inter
483
alia, approximately 40 limousine drivers, 10 tour
guides, 10 reservations clerks, 3 ramp supervisors, and
3 dispatchers.' Overall day-to-day control is vested in
the Employer's operations manager, who is conceded
to be a supervisor. Under the operations manager, and
also conceded to be a supervisory employee, is the chief
dispatcher/chief of airport operations, herein called the
chief dispatcher, who supervises the drivers, dispatch-
ers, -and ramp supervisors. The reservation clerks and
tour guides are supervised by the reservation supervisor
and the director of tours, respectively.
At the beginning of their shifts, drivers pick up their
vehicles at the Employer's garage/office facility and
call the dispatcher on duty, who is located in an office
on the lower level of the airport, to obtain their initial
list of hotel pickups. The drivers then proceed to pick
up the passengers at the various downtown hotels and
drive them to the airport's upper departure level. After
discharging them, they proceed to the lower arrival
level to await passengers seeking inbound service. The
Employer's ramp supervisors, who are stationed at
limousine slots approximately 20 feet from the dis-
patcher's office, greet deplaning passengers, direct
those seeking service to the awaiting vehicles, and
sometimes assist the drivers in loading the passengers'
luggage; Limousines leave the airport on a first-in, first-
out basis. However, ramp supervisors make an effort to
place passengers with common area destinations in the
same limousine. Throughout the day dispatchers con-
tinue to receive service requests from the reservations
clerks and route the limousines around town accord-
ingly via radio communication with the drivers.2
The ramp supervisors record and file the number of
passengers departing from the airport in each limou-
sine. Such reports are prepared in compliance with
Aviation Board regulations. Drivers also submit simi-
lar tallies of the number of passengers they carried
along with cash receipts, at the end of the day. The
Employer retains a copy of the ramp supervisor's tally
and sometimes uses it to cross-check the accuracy of
the driver's trip sheet.'
The dispatchers, in addition to their routing respon-
sibilities, in the absence of admitted supervisors, handle
routine problems such as vehicle breakdowns. How-
ever, in the event of a more serious problem,,they con-
tact the chief dispatcher or the operations manager.
1 There is one dispatcher on each of three 8-hour shifts. The three ramp
supervisors work on two 8-hour shifts from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 4 p in. to
12 midnight.
2 Dispatchers do not specify either the order of pickups or the route
drivers are to take Both are normally dictated by the location of the vehicle
and the requested pickup time.
3 The Employer employs an undisclosed number of plainclothes checkers,
conceded to be guards, whose function is to detect attempts to shortchange
the Employer While the record does indicate that at one time ramp supervi-
sors were sometimes used as plainclothes checkers, it also indicates that the
Employer has abandoned this practice.
217 NLRB No. 91
484 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Also, in the absence of admitted supervisors, the
dispatchers can, on request , permit an employee to
leave early if business is light , or request that he stay
overtime if the workload is heavy. Dispatchers file writ-
ten reports which note the occurrence of anything out
of the ordinary, including employee misconduct;4 and
they are empowered to send an employee home for the
balance of his shift in the event of a serious infraction
such as drunkenness . All such reports and suspensions
are subject to independent investigation and review by
admitted supervisors before the employee involved is
disciplined or loses any pay.
Drivers sometimes fill in for ramp supervisors in case
of illness or during evening hours. The latter fill in for
dispatchers and will substitute for a driver in an emer-
gency. Two of the three present ramp supervisors were
formerly drivers. Ramp supervisors have advanced to
dispatcher, which is a higher paid position. Drivers
waiting for their limousines to be loaded often congre-
gate in the dispatcher's office. As indicated, dispatchers
have frequent telephone communication with reserva-
tion clerks, and the ramp supervisors are in daily con-
tact with both drivers and dispatchers. Dispatchers and
ramp supervisors wear uniforms quite similar to those
worn by drivers.
Limousine drivers, ramp supervisors, and dispatch-
ers, as well as tour guides and reservation clerks, share
identical benefits, such as paid vacations, paid holidays,
and hospitalization insurance. Although the dispatch-
ers receive 15 percent, and the ramp supervisors 10
percent, more per hour than the drivers, only the latter
receive tips. The Employer also maintains a bonus pool
in which only drivers, ramp, supervisors, and dispatch-
ers participate.'
Contrary to the Petitioner, we fmd that neither the
ramp supervisors nor dispatchers are supervisors as
4 Similar reports are filed by the limousine drivers The Employer's opera-
tions manager testified that during the past 6 months he had received
approximately 35 reports of driver misconduct filed by other drivers, and
that both drivers' reports and dispatchers' reports were treated in the same
manner
5 As an incentive the Employer takes 30 percent of its weekly gross
receipts , net of airport rent, and distributes such monies to eligible em-
ployees in proportion to their hours worked.
defined in the Act. Any recommendations which they
make in regard to discipline, in the absence of admitted
supervisors , are in all cases subject to independent in-
vestigation by the latter, and their direction of other
employees is routine in nature.' We also reject the Pe-
titioner's contention that ramp supervisors are guards
by virtue of the fact that their compilation of outbound
passenger tallies may at times be used to cross-check
the tallies submitted by the drivers. In this respect we
note that the Employer utilizes plainclothes guards to
detect acts of theft and embezzlement by the drivers. In
the circumstances, we find that the ramp supervisors'
preparation of passenger tallies for loaded limousines
prior to their departure is but an incident of their ad-
mittedly nonguard duties and does not constitute them
as guards within the meaning of the Act.
We also conclude, contrary to the Regional Director,
that in the light of the facts and circumstances of this
case the interests of the ramp supervisors and dispatch-
ers are so closely linked with those of the drivers, tour
guides, and reservation clerks here involved that only
a unit combining all five classifications of employees is
appropriate. We shall therefore modify the Regional
Director's description of the unit as follows:
All full-time and regular part-time limousine
drivers, tour guides, reservation -clerks, ramp
supervisors, and dispatchers at the Employer's
New Orleans, Louisiana, operations, excluding the
chief dispatcher, all other employees, guards, and
supervisors as defined in the Act.
Accordingly, we shall remand the case to the Re-
gional Director in order that he may conduct an elec-
tion pursuant to his Decision and Direction of Election,
as modified herein, except that the eligibility period
therefor shall be that immediately preceding the date of
this Decision and Review. [Excelsior footnote omitted
from publication.]
6 See Greyhound Airport Services, Inc., 189 NLRB 291 (1971).