Motion for Default Judgment, National Labor Relations Board, Veolia and ATU 1433, Phoenix, AZ

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and Cases 28-CA-023249 28-CA-023358 28-CA-023401 28-CA-023497 AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO

ACTING GENERAL COUNSEL’S MOTIONS FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AND ISSUANCE OF DECISION AND ORDER

The Acting General Counsel (the General Counsel), based on the facts set forth below

and in the attached documents and exhibits, moves, pursuant to Section 102.24 of the National

Labor Relations Board’s Rules and Regulations (the Board’s Rules), that the National Labor

Relations Board (the Board) issue a Decision and Order, prior to and without the necessity of

an evidentiary hearing, containing findings of fact and conclusions of law in accordance with

the Section 8(a)(1), (3) and (5) allegations of the Second Consolidated Complaint in the

above-captioned matter (the Consolidated Complaint), ordering Veolia Transportation

Services, Inc. (Phoenix Division) (Respondent) to appropriately remedy the unfair labor

practices found and granting such other, further relief as may be proper in the circumstances.

In support of this Motion, the General Counsel shows and alleges that:

1. (a) On November 8, 2010, Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1433, AFL-

CIO (the Union), filed a charge in Case 28-CA-023249, a copy of which is attached hereto

and marked as Exhibit 1, alleging that Respondent engaged in certain unfair labor practices

2

affecting commerce set forth and defined in the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.

Section 151 et seq. (the Act).

(b) On February 4, 2011, the Union filed a charge in Case 28-CA-023358,

a copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 2, alleging that Respondent engaged

in certain unfair labor practices affecting commerce set forth and defined in the Act.

(c) On March 14, 2011, the Union filed a charge in Case 28-CA-023401, a

copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 3, alleging that Respondent engaged


(d) On May 6, 2011, the Union filed a charge in Case 28-CA-023497, a

copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 4, alleging that Respondent engaged


2. (a) Upon the charge described above in paragraph 1(a), on

January 31, 2011, the Regional Director for Region 28 (Regional Director), pursuant to

Section 10(b) of the Act and Section 102.15 of the Board’s Rules, issued a Complaint and

Notice of Hearing, a copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 5. On February

12, 2011, Respondent filed with the Regional Director its Answer to the Complaint

(Respondent’s First Answer), by which it denied the commission of the alleged unfair labor

practices.

(b) Upon the charges described above in paragraphs 1(a) through 1(c), on

April 29, 2011, the Regional Director, pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Act and Sections

102.15 and 102.33 of the Board’s Rules, issued an Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated

Complaint and Notice of Hearing, a copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 6.

On May 12, 2011, Respondent filed with the Regional Director its Answer to the

3

Consolidated Complaint (Respondent’s Second Answer), by which it denied the commission

of the alleged unfair labor practices.

(c) Upon the charges described above in paragraphs 1(a) through 1(d), on

June 30, 2011, the Regional Director, pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Act and Sections

102.15 and 102.33 of the Board’s Rules, issued an Order Further Consolidating Cases,

Second Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing, a copy of which is attached hereto

and marked as Exhibit 7 (the Consolidated Complaint), alleging, in pertinent part, that

Respondent violated Sections 8(a)(1), (3) and (5) of the Act by threatening to implement and

implementing its bargaining proposal without first bargaining to impasse; direct dealing with

employees; ceasing to collect Union dues from employee paychecks; failing to provide

information requested by the Union; refusing to process grievances; refusing to meet with the

Union for purposes of negotiating a successor collective-bargaining agreement; engaging in

regressive bargaining; reopening for negotiations various contract articles that had been

previously agreed to by the parties; introducing new contract articles during the middle of

bargaining that were previously not encompassed by the parties’ existing proposals; trying to

require that existing employees would have to reapply for their current jobs; resubmitting

bargaining proposals with insubstantial or no change from prior bargaining proposals; and

bargaining with no intent of reaching an agreement.

(d) On July 14, 2011, Respondent filed with the Regional Director its

Answer to the Second Consolidated Complaint (Respondent’s Third Answer), by which it

denied the commission of the alleged unfair labor practices.

(e) On July 14, 2011, the General Counsel filed a Notice of Intent to

Amend Complaint, a copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 8.

4

(f) On July 20, 2011, the General Counsel filed its Second Notice of Intent

to Amend Complaint, a copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 9.

3. On August 25, 2011, the Regional Director, on a unilateral basis, approved the

informal Settlement Agreement (the Settlement Agreement) in this matter. The Settlement

Agreement was signed by Respondent (Respondent is referred to in the Settlement Agreement

as the Charged Party), on July 25, 2011; the Union did not sign the Settlement Agreement.

Referenced in and attached to the Settlement Agreement is a document setting forth the

language to be inserted into a Notice to Employees (Notice) form, copies of which are

attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 10, as resolution of the outstanding allegations in the

Consolidated Complaint. The Settlement Agreement provides that Respondent shall post the

Notice; make whole Unit employees for any loss of earnings or other benefits they may have

suffered as a result of Respondent’s unilateral changes; provide information requested by the

Union; arbitrate a grievance; and restore the status quo as it existed prior to Respondent’s

unilateral changes and continue the status quo unless and until the Union states its desire not

to bargain over a change, a collective-bargaining agreement is reached with the Union, or a

lawful impasse is reached in bargaining.

4. (a) The Settlement Agreement also contains a provision entitled

“Performance,” requiring immediate compliance with the Settlement Agreement’s terms, and

the following provision addressing the event of Respondent’s non-compliance with the terms

of the Settlement Agreement:

The Charged Party agrees that in case of non-compliance with any of the terms of this Settlement Agreement by the Charged Party, and after 14 days notice from the Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board of such noncompliance without remedy by the Charged Party, the Regional Director will reissue the complaint previously issued on June 30, 2011, in the instant cases, with the addition of the amendments thereto, as further set

5

forth in the Acting General Counsel’s Second Notice of Intent to Amend Complaint, dated July 20, 2011. Thereafter, the General Counsel may file a motion for default judgment with the Board on the allegations of the complaint. The Charged Party understands and agrees that the allegations of the aforementioned complaint, as amended, will be deemed admitted and its Answer to such complaint, and amendments thereto, will be considered withdrawn. The only issue that may be raised before the Board is whether the Charged Party defaulted on the terms of this Settlement Agreement. The Board may then, without necessity of trial or any other proceeding, find all allegations of the complaint to be true and make findings of fact and conclusions of law consistent with those allegations adverse to the Charged Party, on all issues raised by the pleadings. The Board may then issue an order providing a full remedy for the violations found as is customary to remedy such violations. The parties further agree that the U.S. Court of Appeals Judgment may be entered enforcing the Board order ex parte, after service or attempted service upon Charged Party/Respondent at the last address provided to the General Counsel.

(b) On September 13, 2011, Region 28’s Compliance Officer (the

Compliance Officer), on behalf of the General Counsel, sent a package of information to

Respondent and Respondent’s counsel via regular mail. The package contained copies of the

Notice to Employees, as provided for by the terms of the Settlement Agreement; a letter, a

copy of which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 11, detailing Respondent’s

obligations under the Settlement Agreement; and a Certification of Posting form, to be signed

by an official of Respondent and returned to Region 28.

(c) On or about September 15, 2011, Respondent notified the Compliance

Officer, in writing, by means of a Certification of Compliance, that, pursuant to the

Settlement Agreement, Respondent would meet and bargain in good faith with the Union

regarding the terms of a successor agreement; that Respondent had made Unit employees

whole for losses suffered as a result of the unilateral changes alleged in the Consolidated

Complaint; had provided the Union with the information described in the Consolidated

6

Complaint, and had posted the Notice at various locations. A copy of Respondent’s

communication with the Compliance Officer is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 12.

(d) Since the Settlement Agreement was signed by Respondent,

Respondent has failed and refused to bargain in good faith with the Union as provided for in

the Settlement Agreement or otherwise comply with all terms of the Settlement Agreement,

despite its clear agreement to do so as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, and contrary to

Respondent’s statements set forth on the Certification of Compliance (Exhibit 12), including,

but not limited to, by the following acts and conduct:

(1) On August 9, 2011, at the first bargaining

session following its execution of the Settlement Agreement and

before the approval of the signed Settlement Agreement by the

Regional Director, Respondent presented the Union with a best and

final bargaining proposal (Final Proposal) that contained insubstantial

or no change from its bargaining proposal submitted July 21, 2011,

prior to executing the Settlement Agreement;

(2) On September 15, 2011, at the next bargaining

session, on the first day of the Notice-posting period in this matter,

Respondent declared an impasse in negotiations and its intent to

implement its Final Proposal sometime in October or November 2011;

(3) On October 25, 2011, at the next bargaining

session, at a time during the Notice-posting period in this matter,

Respondent again declared an impasse and its intent to implement its

Final Proposal on November 28, 2011; and,

7

(4) On November 28, 2011, Respondent

implemented its Final Proposal, including a one-time severance buy-

out proposal.

(e) On January 31, 2012, by letter, a copy of which is attached hereto and

marked as Exhibit 13, the Regional Director, notified Respondent’s counsel that Respondent

was in non-compliance with the Settlement Agreement, as follows:

On August 25, 2011, the Regional Director unilaterally approved the informal Board Settlement Agreement (Agreement) executed by Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. (Charged Party) in Cases 28-CA-023249, 28-CA-023358, 28-CA-023401, and 28-CA-023497. On November 3, 2011, Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1433, AFL-CIO (Union), filed a charge in Case 28-CA-068169, alleging additional bad-faith bargaining and other violations, some of which involve conduct similar to that addressed and encompassed by the terms of the Agreement.

The Region fully investigated this charge[], and the subsequent charge filed by the Union in Case 28-CA-071493, and found merit to allegations made in those charges.

The investigation of the recently filed charges, as well as the investigation into your client’s compliance with the Agreement shows that your client has not complied with all terms of the Agreement. As a result, this is to notify you, to the degree that it has not been communicated previously, that your client is in non-compliance with the Agreement. Such non-compliance triggers the default language set forth in the Agreement.

(f) On January 31, 2012, the Regional Director issued an Order

Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing in Cases 28-CA-068169

and 28-CA-071493, which involve the same parties, alleging that Respondent violated Section

8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act by the acts and conduct described above in paragraph 4(d), and

noticing a hearing before an administrative law judge of the Board to commence on

April 3, 2012, in Phoenix, Arizona. A copy of the Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated

8

Complaint and Notice of Hearing in Cases 28-CA-068169 and 28-CA-071493 is attached

hereto and marked as Exhibit 14.

5. At no time since it entered into the Settlement Agreement and the Settlement

Agreement was approved by the Regional Director has Respondent complied with its

obligation under the Settlement Agreement to bargain in good faith with the Union until such

time as an agreement, or a lawful impasse, is reached.

6. Accordingly, on March 9, 2012, the General Counsel, by the Regional

Director, reissued a Consolidated Complaint in the captioned matter, a copy of which is

attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 15, based upon the allegations made in the charges

referred to above in paragraph 1 and as described in the Settlement Agreement.

7. (a) As referenced above in paragraph 4(a), the Settlement Agreement

provides that in the event of non-compliance, Respondent will not contest the validity of the

allegations made in the Consolidated Complaint, as amended. The Settlement Agreement

clearly sets forth that the only issue Respondent may raise in response to an Order to Show

Cause the Board may subsequently issue, upon receipt of the instant Motion, is whether it

defaulted on the terms of the Settlement Agreement. The Board has explicitly approved of

such a provision and found it enforceable. See Ernest Lee Tile Contractors, Inc., 330 NLRB

No. 61 (2000) (language enforceable despite partial compliance with settlement agreement);

Tuv Taam Corp., 340 NLRB 756 (2003); and Chicago Parking Company, 356 NLRB No. 72

(January 11, 2011). Respondent has had ample time to comply with the terms of the

Settlement Agreement; yet, it has failed to do so.

(b) In view of the foregoing, the General Counsel respectfully moves that

the Board:

9

(1) Find that Respondent’s First Answer, Second Answer and Third

Answer be considered withdrawn pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement; that

Respondent has waived its right to file an answer to the reissued Consolidated Complaint

under the terms of the Settlement Agreement; that the allegations of the reissued Consolidated

Complaint be deemed to be true; and that no hearing is necessary.

(2) Find that Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1), (3) and (5) of the

Act, as alleged in the reissued Consolidated Complaint; and,

(3) Issue a Decision and Order containing findings of fact and

conclusions of law based on, and in accordance with, the allegations of the reissued

Consolidated Complaint, and remedying such unfair labor practices; and specifically that the

Board’s Order should provide that Respondent post a Notice to Employees, bargain with the

Union, upon request take the other action provided for in the Settlement Agreement, and grant

such other relief as may be appropriate and proper to remedy the allegations in the reissued

Consolidated Complaint.

Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 9th day of March 2012.

Respectfully submitted, /s/ Mary G. Davidson Mary G. Davidson Counsel for the Acting General Counsel National Labor Relations Board 2600 North Central Avenue, Suite 1400 Phoenix, AZ 85004 Telephone: 602-640-2117 Facsimile: 602-640-2178 E-mail: [email protected]

Exhibit 1

FORM EXEMPT UNDER 44 U S C 3512

FORM NLRB-501 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA(2-08) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE

CHARGE AGAINST EMPLOYER Case Date Filed

INSTRUCTIONS: 28-CA-23249 11/8/10File an original with NLRB Regional Director for the region in which the alleged unfair labor practice occurred or is occurring.

1. EMPLOYER AGAINST WHOM CHARGE IS BROUGHTa Name of Employer b Tel NoVeolia Transportatin Services. Inc-l"hocrux Division (630)382-1092

c Cell No

f Fax Nod Address (Street, city, state, and ZIP code) e Employer Representative (630)214-104()2015 Spring Rd- Suite 750 Greg Wagoner. g e-Mail

1 14RMOak Brook. It- 60523 h Number of workers employed

1 650i Type of Establishment (factory, mine, wholesaler, etc) I Identify principal product or serviceTransportion Public Transportation

k The above-named employer has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of section 8(a), subsections (1) and (list

subsections) (5) of the National Labor Relations Act, and these unfair laborpractices are practices affecting commerce within the meaning of the Act, or these unfair labor practices are unfair practices affecting commercewithin the meaninq of the Act and the Postal ReorcIanization Act

2 Basis of the Charge (set forth a clear and concise statement of the facts constituting the alleged unfair labor practices)Within the last six months, the above-named Employer has unlawfully failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information that isnecessary for, and relevant to, theUnion's performance of its duties as the collective-bargaining representative of the employees.

By the above and other acts, the above-named Employer has interfered with, restrained, and coerced employees in the exercise of therights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.

3 Full name of party filing charge (if labor organization, give full name, including local name and number)Amalgamated Transit Union. Local # 1433

4c Address (Street and number, city, state, and ZIP code) 4a Tel NoP.O. Box 4366 (602)495-9466

4b Cell No(602)663-3801

4d Fax NoPhoenix. AZ 85030 (602)495-1385

4e e-Mailaftl 1433vicepi-e.,(ei qxcqoll-icc.iict

5 Full name of national or international labor organization of which it is an affiliate or constituent unit (to be filled in when charge is filed by a labororganization) 'I he Amalgamated] ransit Union

6. DECLARATION Tel NoI declare that I have read the above charge and that the statements are true to the best of my knowledge and belief

Office, if any, Cell NoBy A.-L,

(signature of representative or person making charge) (PrintItype name and title or office, if any) Fax No

e-Mailsame as aboveAddress (date)

WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS ON THIS CHARGE CAN BE PUNISHED BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT (U.S. CODE, TITLE 18, SECTION 1001)PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT 28-2010-4225

Solicitation of the information on this form is authorized by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. The principal use of the information is to assistthe National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in processing unfair labor practice and related proceedings or litigation. The routine uses for the information are fully setforth inthe Federal Register, 71 Fed. Reg. 74942-43 (Dec. 13, 2006). The NLRB will further explain these uses upon request, Disclosure of this information to the NLRB isvoluntary; however, failure to supply the information will cause the NLRB to decline to invoke its processes.

RECEIVED PHX- AZNLRB-REGION 28

2011 NOV -8 PM 1: 44

Exhibit 2

FORM EXEMPT UNDER 44 U S C 3512

FORM NLRB-501 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE(2-08) NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

CHARGE AGAINST EMPLOYER Case Date iled

INSTRUCTIONS: 28-CA-23358 2/4/11File an original with NLRB Regional Director for the region in which the alleged unfair labor practice occurred or is occurring.

1. EMPLOYER AGAINST WHOM CHARGE IS BROUGHTa Name of Employer b Tel NoVeolia Fransportation Services. Inc.. Phoenix Division (602)229-4739

c Cell No

f Fax Nod. Address (Street, city, state, and ZIP code) e Employer Representative2225 W. Lo cr Buckeye Road Barrick Neill g e-Mail

Phoenix. AZ 85009 h Number of workers employed

i Type of Establishment (factory, mine, wholesaler, etc 1. Identify principal product or servicePublic Transportation Public 'I ransportation

k The above-named employer has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of section 8(a), subsections (1) and (list

subsections) (5) of the National Labor Relations Act, and these unfair labor

practices are practices affecting commerce within the meaning of the Act, or these unfair labor practices are unfair practices affecting commercewithin the meaninq of the Act and the Postal Reorcianization Act

2 Basis of the Charge (set forth a clear and concise statement of the facts constituting the alleged unfair labor practices)

Within the last six months, the above-nanned Employer has discriminated against its employees by, airiong other things, bargaining in badfaith including by engaging in surface bar0aining, refusing to provide infon-nation to the below-named Union pursuant to informationrequests, direct dealing with the represented employees, engaging in unilateral changes, disparaging the Union, and by failing to renlitdues pursuant to dues check off.

By the above and other acts. the above-narned employer has interfered with, restrained, and coerced employees in tile exercise of tilerights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.

3 Full name of party filing charge (if labor organization, give full name, including local name and number)Amalgamated Transit Union. Local # 1433

4c Address (Street and number, city, state, and ZIP code) 4a Tel NoP.O. Box 4366 (602)495-9466

4b Cell No(602)663-3801

4d Fax NoPhoenix. AZ 85030 (602)495-1385

4e e-Mailalu 1433vicepi-es(( ,q\ c,,Iol'licc-iic(

5. Full name of national or international labor organization of which it is an affiliate or constituent unit (to be filled in when charge is filed by a labororganization) The Amalgamated Transit Union

6 DECLARATION Tel NoI declare that I have read the above charle and that the statements are true to the best of my knowledge and belief

Michael Cornelius, Vice President Office, if any, Cell NoBy

(SIgnatureofrep sentative 31pers Infmaklng charge) (Print/type name and title or office, if any) Fax No

e-Mailsame as 4 c above 02/04/201 1

Address (date)

WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS ON THIS CHARGE CAN BE PUNISHED BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT (U.S. CODE, TITLE 18, SECTION 1001)PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT 28-2011-0305

Solicitation of the information on this form is authorized by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. The principal use of the information is to assistthe National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in processing unfair labor practice and related proceedings or litigation. The routine uses for the information arefully setforth inthe Federal Register, 71 Fed. Reg. 74942-43 (Dec. 13, 2006). The NLRB will further explain these uses upon request. Disclosure of this information to the NLRB isvoluntary; however, failure to supply the information will cause the NLRB to decline to invoke its processes.

RECEIVED PHX. AZNLRB-REGION 28

2017 FEB -4 PM 2: 48

Exhibit 3

03/12/2011 05:1e 60227917 WARDKEENAN PAGE 02/02

FORM FXEMPT UNDF-11 4A U.S.0 35 12

IWERNET UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 00 NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACEFORM NLR5-501 NAT10NAL LABOR RELATIONS WARD(2-0a) CHARGE AGAINST EMPLOYER Case Date Filed

INSTRUCTIONS: 28-CA-23401 03/14/2011PRO MA Orlplinal wlth NLR13 Reqionak Director for the region in which the all!!Ved unfair labor practice occurred or is accurring,

1. EMPLOYER AGAINST WHOM CHARGE IS BR-QUGHTa. Name of Employer b- Tel. No. 602-229-4739Veolia Transportation Services, Inc,, Phoenix, Division c. Cell No.

f, Fax No.

d. Address (Street cify smie, and ZIP code) e. Employer Representative

2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Sarrick Neill g. e-mail

Phoenix, Arizona 85009

h. Number of workers employed

600+

i, Type of Establishment (factW, mine, wholesaler, eW,) j. Identify principal product or service

Public Transportation Public Transportadon

k. The above-named employer has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of section 6(a), subsections (1) and (list

subsections) (3) and (5) . of the National Labor Relations Act, and these unfair labor

practices are practices affecting commerce within the meaning of the Act, or these unfair labor practices are unfair practices affecting commerce

within the meaning of the Act and the Postal ReorganiZation Act.

2. Basis of the Charge (set forlh a c4ear and condse statement of the facts consiltuting the alleged unfaiViaborpractices)

During the past six months, the above named employer (1) implemented part of its Sick Leave proposal at a time when the

parties were not at an overall impasse in bargaining, (2) engaged in regressive, bad-faith, and surface bargaining by

reopening for negotiations articles which were previously agreed to by the parties during earlier negotiations; (3) has

refused to process grievances up through, and including, arbitration, and (4) has engaged in an overall pattem of bad faith

and surface bargaining. Also, on or about February 7, 2011, the Employer unilaterally terminated monthly dues checkoffs.

On February 16, 2011. the Employer unilaterally reinstated an absentee policy which had been suspended since July of

2010. The charging party requests 100) relief. By the above and other acts, theabove-named Employer has interfered

with, restrained, and coerced employees in the exercise of their rightz guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.

3. Fullnameatpa filing charge (if labor a anization, give full name, Including local name and number)Amalgamated ifransit Union, LocalT433

4a, Address (Stmet and number, city, state, and ZIP code) 4b. Tel. No. 602-495-9466

P.O. Box 4366 4c. Cell No.Phoenix, AZ 85030 602-563-3801

4d, Fox No. 602-495-1385

4e. e-Mail

5. Full name of national or internalional labor organization of which it is an affiliate or constituent unit (fo be filled In when charge is filed by a labor

0'7g"7'za6ot') The Amalgamated Transit Union

6. DECLARAMON Tel. No,I declare that I have read the charge and that the statements are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. 602-279-1717

.y Michael J. Keenan, Attorneys Office, it any, Cell No.

(4avnafu icf-represenral"er rion F.king -charge) ("Mype name and Wo or office. ifi2ny) Fax No- 802-279-8908

3838 N. Central, Ste. 1720, Phoenix, Arizona 85012 03(14/2011 e-Mall

Address (date)

WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS ON THIS CHARGE CAN BE PUNISHED BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT (US. CODE, TITLE 18. SECTION 10011)

PRIVACY ACT STATEMENTSdicitation of the information on this fbrrn is authorized by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), 29 U.S.C. § 151 of seq. The principal use of the Information Is to assistthe National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) in processing unfair labor practice and related p=eedings or litigation, The routine uses for the informafion are fully setforth inthe Federal Register, 71 Fed, Reg. 74942-43 (Dec. 13, 2006). The NLRB will further explain these uses upon request Disclosure of this information to the NLRB isvoluntary, however, f2ilure to supply the information will cause the NLRB to decline to invoke its processes.

RECEIVED PHX, AZNLRB-REGION 28

2011 MAR 14 PM 1: 45

Exhibit 4

Exhibit 5


REGION 28

VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and Case 28-CA-23249 AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO

COMPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING

Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1433, AFL-CIO, herein called the Union,

has charged that Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. (Phoenix Division), herein called the

Respondent, has been engaging in unfair labor practices as set forth in the National Labor

Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 151, et seq., herein called the Act. Based thereon the Acting

General Counsel, by the undersigned, pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Act and Section 102.15

of the Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board,

issues this Complaint and Notice of Hearing and alleges as follows:

1. The charge in this proceeding was filed by the Union on

November 8, 2010, and a copy was served by regular mail on the Respondent on the same

date.

2. (a) At all material times the Respondent, an Arizona corporation,

with an office and place of business in Phoenix, Arizona, herein called the Respondent’s

facility, has been engaged in the business of operating transportation services including bus

services.

2

(b) During the 12-month period ending November 8, 2010, the

Respondent, in conducting its business operations described above in paragraph 2(a), derived

gross revenues in excess of $250,000.

(c) During the 12-month period ending November 8, 2010, the

Respondent, in conducting its business operations described above in paragraph 2(a),

performed services valued in excess of $50,000 in States other than the State of Arizona.

(d) At all material times the Respondent has been an employer

engaged in commerce within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the Act.

3. At all material times the Union has been a labor organization within the

meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.

4. At all material times the following individuals held the positions set

forth opposite their respective names and have been supervisors of the Respondent within the

meaning of Section 2(11) of the Act and agents of the Respondent within the meaning of

Section 2(13) of the Act:

Barrick Neill - Vice President Sandi Claridge - Director of Human Relations Vasti Amaro - Director of Operations

5. (a) The following employees of the Respondent, herein called the

Unit, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the

meaning of Section 9(b) of the Act:

All full-time and part time bus operators and part-time road supervisors operating at or out of the Respondent’s facilities, excluding all other employees, office clerical employees, full-time road supervisors, lead operators, dispatchers, dispatch supervisors, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.

3

(b) Since in or about 2001, and at all material times, the Union has

been the designated exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Unit and since then

the Union has been recognized as the representative by the Respondent or its predecessors.

This recognition has been embodied in successive collective-bargaining agreements, the most

recent of which is effective from July 1, 2005, to June 30, 2010, herein called the Agreement.

(c) At all times since 2001, based on Section 9(a) of the Act, the

Union has been the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Unit.

6. (a) Since on or about November 4, 2010, the Union, by e-mail, has

requested the Respondent furnish the Union with the nanogram readings for all drugs alleged

to have been found in employee Miguel Sevadra’s specimen sample.

(b) Since on or about November 10, 2010, the Union, by e-mail,

has requested the Respondent furnish the Union with the following information:

(1) a copy of any and all infraction notices issued to any employee for violating the drug and alcohol policy; and,

(2) a copy of the minutes for all hearings conducted for violations of the drug and alcohol policy.

(c) The information requested by the Union, as described above in

paragraphs 6(a) and 6(b), is necessary for, and relevant to, the Union’s performance of its

duties as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Unit.

(d) Since on or about November 4, 2010, the Respondent has failed

and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it as described above in

paragraph 6(a).

(e) Since on or about November 10, 2010, the Respondent has

failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it as described

above in paragraphs 6(b).

4

7. By the conduct described above in paragraph 6, the Respondent has

been failing and refusing to bargain collectively with the exclusive collective-bargaining

representative of its employees in violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act.

8. The unfair labor practices of the Respondent described above affect

commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act.

ANSWER REQUIREMENT

The Respondent is notified that, pursuant to Sections 102.20 and 102.21 of the

Board’s Rules and Regulations, it must file an answer to this complaint. The answer must

be received by this office on or before February 14, 2011, or postmarked on or before

February 12, 2011.

An answer may also be filed electronically by using the E-Filing system on the

Agency’s website. In order to file an answer electronically, access the Agency’s website at

http://www.nlrb.gov, click on the E-Gov tab, select E-Filing, and then follow the detailed

instructions. The responsibility for the receipt and usability of the answer rests exclusively

upon the sender. Unless notification on the Agency’s website informs users that the Agency’s

E-Filing system is officially determined to be in technical failure because it is unable to

receive documents for a continuous period of more than 2 hours after 12:00 noon (Eastern

Time) on the due date for filing, a failure to timely file the answer will not be excused on the

basis that the transmission could not be accomplished because the Agency’s website was off-

line or unavailable for some other reason. The Board’s Rules and Regulations require that an

answer be signed by counsel or non-attorney representative for represented parties or by the

party if not represented. See Section 102.21. If the answer being filed electronically is a pdf

document containing the required signature, no paper copies of the document need to be

5

transmitted to the Regional Office. However, if the electronic version of an answer to a

complaint is not a pdf file containing the required signature, then the E-filing rules require

that such answer containing the required signature be submitted to the Regional Office by

traditional means within three (3) business days after the date of electronic filing.

Service of the answer on each of the other parties must be accomplished in

conformance with the requirements of Section 102.114 of the Board’s Rules and Regulations.

The answer may not be filed by facsimile transmission. If no answer is filed or if an answer is

filed untimely, the Board may find, pursuant to Motion for Default Judgment, that the

allegations in the complaint are true.

NOTICE OF HEARING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on March 1, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. (local time), in

the Hearing Room, National Labor Relations Board, 2600 North Central Avenue, Suite 1800,

Phoenix, Arizona, and on consecutive days thereafter until concluded, a hearing will be

conducted before an administrative law judge of the National Labor Relations Board. At the

hearing, Respondent and any other party to this proceeding have the right to appear and

present testimony regarding the allegation in this complaint. The procedures to be followed at

the hearing are described in the attached Form NLRB-4668. The procedure to request a

postponement of the hearing is described in the attached Form NLRB-4338.

Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 31st day of January 2011. /s/ Cornele A. Overstreet Cornele A. Overstreet, Regional Director Attachments

Form NLRB-877

U N I T E D S T A T E S O F A M E R I C A B E F O R E T H E N A T I O N A L L A B O R R E L A T I O N S B O A R D

VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL #1433, AFL-CIO

Case 28-CA-23249 DATE OF MAILING: January 31, 2011

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE OF: COMPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING with form NLRB-4668

attached I, the undersigned employee of the National Labor Relations Board, being duly sworn, depose and say that on the date indicated above I served the above-entitled document(s) by postpaid certified mail upon the following persons, addressed to them at the following addresses: Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 2015 Spring Road, Suite 750 Oak Brook, IL 60523 7001 0320 0000 2489 9580

James Foster, Attorney at Law McMahon-Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039

Amalgamated Transit Union, Local #1433 P.O. Box 4366 Phoenix, AZ 85030

Michael Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward, Keenan & Barrett, PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012

Reporters: Argie Reporting Service

/s/ Katherine Stanley Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31st day of January 2011.

DESIGNATED AGENT /s/ Kathleen Smart

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

FORM NLRB-4338 (6-90) 95kdh

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

NOTICE

Case: 28-CA-23249

The issuance of the notice of formal hearing in this case does not mean that the matter cannot be disposed of by agreement of the parties. On the contrary, it is the policy of this office to encourage voluntary adjustments. The examiner or attorney assigned to the case will be pleased to receive and to act promptly upon your suggestions or comments to this end. An agreement between the parties, approved by the Regional Director, would serve to cancel the hearing. However, unless otherwise specifically ordered, the hearing will be held at the date, hour and place indicated. Postponements will not be granted unless good and sufficient grounds are shown and the following requirements are met: (1) The request must be in writing. An original and two copies must be filed the Regional Director when appropriate

under 29 CFR 102.16(a) or with the Division of Judges when appropriate under 29 CFR 102.16(b). (2) Grounds must be set forth in detail; (3) Alternative dates for any rescheduled hearing must be given; (4) The positions of all other parties must be ascertained in advance by the requesting party and set forth in the request;

and (5) Copies must be simultaneously served on all other parties (listed below), and that fact must be noted on the request. Except under the most extreme conditions, no request for postponement will be granted during the three days immediately preceding the date of hearing.

Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 2015 Spring Road, Suite 750 Oak Brook, IL 60523


Amalgamated Transit Union, Local #1433 P.O. Box 4366 Phoenix, AZ 85030

Michael Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward, Keenan & Barrett, PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012

Exhibit 6


REGION 28

VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and Cases 28-CA-23249 28-CA-23358 28-CA-23401 AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO

ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES, CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING

Upon charges filed by Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1433, AFL-CIO,

herein called the Union, in Case 28-CA-23249, a Complaint and Notice of Hearing issued on

January 31, 2011, against Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. (Phoenix Division), herein

called the Respondent, and the Union in Cases 28-CA-23358 and 28-CA-23401 has charged

that the Respondent has been engaging in unfair labor practices as set forth in the National

Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq., herein called the Act. Based thereon, and in

order to avoid unnecessary costs or delays, the Acting General Counsel, by the undersigned,

pursuant to Section 102.33 of the Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations

Board, herein called the Board, ORDERS that these cases are consolidated.

These cases having been consolidated, the Acting General Counsel, by the

undersigned, pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Act and Section 102.15 of the Board’s Rules

and Regulations, issues this Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Complaint and Notice

of Hearing and alleges as follows:

2

1. (a) The charge in Case 28-CA-23249 was filed by the Union on


date.

(b) The charge in Case 28-CA-23358 was filed by the Union on

February 4, 2011, and a copy was served by regular mail on the Respondent on

February 8, 2011.

(c) The charge in Case 28-CA-23401 was filed by the Union on

March 14, 2011, and a copy was served by regular mail on the Respondent on the same date.

2. (a) At all material times the Respondent, a Maryland corporation,



services.











3

4. (a) At all material times the following individuals held the

positions set forth opposite their respective names and have been supervisors of the

Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(11) of the Act and agents of the Respondent

within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the Act:

Barrick Neill - Vice President of Operations Sandi Claridge - Director of Human Relations Vasti Amaro - Director of Operations Kevin Healy - Vice President Labor Relations Larry Kucera - General Manager

(b) At all material times the Respondent’s counsels have served as

the Respondent’s negotiators and have been agents of the Respondent within the meaning of

Section 2(l3) of the Act.




All full-time and part-time bus operators and part-time road supervisors operating at or out of the Respondent’s facilities, excluding all other employees, office clerical employees, full-time road supervisors, lead operators, dispatchers, dispatch supervisors, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.





recent of which was effective from July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2010, herein called the

Agreement, which was extended by agreement of the parties to October 3, 2010.

4



6. (a) On or about March 3, 2011, the Respondent, by its counsel, at

the offices of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services, threatened employees that

further bargaining over the Respondent’s severance proposal would be futile, by telling them

that the Respondent would unilaterally implement its severance proposal when impasse was

reached.

(b) On or about March 11, 2011, the Respondent, by Barrick Neill,

at Respondent’s facility, threatened employees by informing them that the Respondent had

stopped collecting union dues from their paychecks.



to have been found in employee Miguel Saavedra’s specimen sample.



(1) a copy of any and all infraction notices issued to any employee for violating the drug and alcohol policy; and, (2) a copy of the minutes for all hearings conducted for violations of the drug and alcohol policy.

(c) The information requested by the Union, as described above in



5


and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it as described above in

paragraph 7(a).


failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it as described

above in paragraphs 7(b).

(f) On or about December 1, 2010, the Respondent implemented its

collective-bargaining proposal regarding Unit employee sick-leave accrual.

(g) (1) In or about March 2011, a more precise date being

unknown to the Acting General Counsel, the Respondent changed the terms of the Agreement

by ceasing to collect from employee paychecks and remit to the Union the employees’ union

dues.

(2) The Respondent engaged in the conduct described above

in paragraph 7(g)(1) because the Unit employees formed, joined or assisted the Union and

engaged in concerted activities, and to discourage employees from engaging in these

activities.

(h) On or about April 15, 2011, the Respondent implemented its

collective-bargaining proposal regarding a severance package for existing employees.

(i) The subjects set forth above in paragraphs 7(f), 7(g), and 7(h)

relate to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment of Unit employees and

are a mandatory subject for the purposes of collective bargaining.

(j) The Respondent engaged in the conduct described above in

paragraphs 7(e) through 7(f), without affording the Union an opportunity to bargain with the

6

Respondent with respect to this conduct and or the effects of this conduct and without first

bargaining with the Union to a good-faith impasse and at a time where no overall impasse had

been reached on bargaining for a successor-agreement as a whole.

(k) Since on or about February 25, 2011, the Respondent has

refused to arbitrate a grievance filed by the Union relating to Miguel Saavedra.

(l) In or about October 2011, a more precise date being unknown

to the Acting General Counsel, the Respondent announced to the Union that it would not

process any grievances filed by the Union after the expiration of the Agreement.

(m) Since on or about October 10, 2011, the Respondent has refused

to arbitrate any grievances related to the Unit.

(n) On or about March 15, 2011, the Respondent, by Barrick Neill,

at Respondent’s facility, bypassed the Union and dealt directly with its employees in the Unit

by informing them that the Respondent had implemented a severance package for existing

employees and of the requirements to receive a severance package.

(o) From January 2010 through June 2010, the Respondent refused

to meet with the Union for purposes of negotiating a successor collective-bargaining

agreement to the Agreement.

(p) At various times during the months of June 2010 through

April 2011, the Respondent and the Union met for purposes of negotiating a successor

collective-bargaining agreement to the Agreement.

(q) During the period described above in paragraph 7(p), the

Respondent engaged in the following conduct:

(1) engaged in regressive bargaining;

7

(2) reopened for negotiations various contract articles that

had been previously agreed to by the parties;

(3) introduced new contract articles during the middle of

bargaining that were previously not encompassed by the parties’ existing proposals;

(4) tried to require that existing employees, before they

could continue their employment, would have to reapply for their current jobs, undergo a

background check, undergo a drug test, complete a new I-9 form, and sign a confidentiality

agreement;

(5) proposed reductions in existing benefits, wages, and

other terms and conditions of employment;

(6) resubmitted proposals to the Union with insubstantial or

no changes to the proposals; and

(7) bargained with no intent of reaching an agreement.

(r) By its overall conduct, including the conduct described above in

paragraphs 6 and 7(a) through 7(q), the Respondent has failed and refused to bargain in good

faith with the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Unit.


been interfering with, restraining, and coercing employees in the rights guaranteed in Section

7 of the Act in violation of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.

9. By the conduct described above in paragraphs 7(g)(1) and 7(g)(2), the

Respondent has been discriminating in regard to the hire or tenure or terms and conditions of

employment of its employees, thereby discouraging membership in a labor organization in

violation of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.

8


been failing and refusing to bargain collectively and in good faith with the exclusive

collective-bargaining representative of its employees within the meaning of Section 8(d) of

the Act in violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act.



WHEREFORE, as part of the remedy for the unfair labor practices alleged

above in paragraphs 6 through 10, the Acting General Counsel seeks an order requiring the

Respondent to: (1) bargain with the Union for not less than 24 hours per month for at least six

hours per session, or another schedule mutually agreed to by the parties, until a complete

collective-bargaining agreement or good-faith impasse is reached; (2) prepare a written

bargaining report every 15 days and submit them to the Regional Director for Region 28 and

also serve the reports on the Union with an opportunity to reply; (3) reimburse the Union for

its bargaining costs and expenses, from its initial request to bargain for a successor agreement

to the present; and (4) rescind the Respondent’s various unilateral changes and restoration of

the status-quo ante. The Acting General Counsel further seeks such other relief as may be

appropriate to remedy the unfair labor practices alleged.

ANSWER REQUIREMENT



be received by this office on or before May 13, 2011 or postmarked on or before

May 12, 2011.

9

An answer may also be filed electronically through the Agency’s website. To

file electronically, go to www.nlrb.gov, click on File Case Documents, enter the NLRB Case

Number, and follow the detailed instructions. The responsibility for the receipt and usability

of the answer rests exclusively upon the sender. Unless notification on the Agency’s website

informs users that the Agency’s E-Filing system is officially determined to be in technical

failure because it is unable to receive documents for a continuous period of more than 2 hours

after 12:00 noon (Eastern Time) on the due date for filing, a failure to timely file the answer

will not be excused on the basis that the transmission could not be accomplished because the

Agency’s website was off-line or unavailable for some other reason. The Board’s Rules and

Regulations require that an answer be signed by counsel or non-attorney representative for

represented parties or by the party if not represented. See Section 102.21. If the answer being

filed electronically is a pdf document containing the required signature, no paper copies of the

answer need to be transmitted to the Regional Office. However, if the electronic version of an

answer to a complaint is not a pdf file containing the required signature, then the E-filing rules

require that such answer containing the required signature continue to be submitted to the

Regional Office by traditional means within three (3) business days after the date of electronic

filing.

Service of the answer on each of the other parties must still be accomplished

by means allowed under the Board’s Rules and Regulations. The answer may not be filed by

facsimile transmission. If no answer is filed, or if an answer is filed untimely, the Board may

find, pursuant to a Motion for Default Judgment, that the allegations in the complaint are true.

10

NOTICE OF HEARING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on May 24, 2011, at 9 a.m. (local time), in the

Hearing Room, National Labor Relations Board, 2600 North Central Avenue, Suite 1800,







Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 29th day of April 2011. /s/ Cornele A. Overstreet Cornele A. Overstreet, Regional Director Attachments

Form NLRB-877



Cases 28-CA-23249 28-CA-23358 28-CA-23401 DATE OF MAILING: April 29, 2011

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE OF: ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES, CONSOLIDATED

COMPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING with form NLRB-4668 attached

I, the undersigned employee of the National Labor Relations Board, being duly sworn, depose and say that on the date indicated above I served the above-entitled document(s) by postpaid certified mail upon the following persons, addressed to them at the following addresses: Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 720 East Butterfield Road, Suite 300 Lombard, IL 60148 7001 0320 0000 2489 8026 Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, AZ 85009 7001 0320 0000 2489 8019


Amalgamated Transit Union, Local #1433 512 West Adams, Suite #2 P.O. Box 4366 Phoenix, AZ 85030

Michael Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward, Keenan & Barrett, PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012 Joseph M. Burns, Attorney at Law Jacobs, Burns, Orlove, Stanton & Hernandez 122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1720 Chicago, IL 60603


/s/ Katherine Stanley Subscribed and sworn to before me this 29th day of April 2011.





NOTICE

Cases: 28-CA-23249

28-CA-23358 28-CA-23401

The issuance of the notice of formal hearing in this case does not mean that the matter cannot be disposed of by agreement of the parties. On the contrary, it is the policy of this office to encourage voluntary adjustments. The examiner or attorney assigned to the case will be pleased to receive and to act promptly upon your suggestions or comments to this end. An agreement between the parties, approved by the Regional Director, would serve to cancel the hearing. However, unless otherwise specifically ordered, the hearing will be held at the date, hour and place indicated. Postponements will not be granted unless good and sufficient grounds are shown and the following requirements are met: (1) The request must be in writing. An original and two copies must be filed with the Regional Director when appropriate



Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 720 East Butterfield Road, Suite 300 Lombard, IL 60148 Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, AZ 85009




Exhibit 7


REGION 28


ORDER FURTHER CONSOLIDATING CASES, SECOND CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING

Upon charges filed by Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1433, AFL-CIO,

herein called the Union, in Cases 28-CA-23249, 28-CA-23358, and 28-CA-23401, against

Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. (Phoenix Division), herein called the Respondent, an

Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing issued on

April 29, 2011, and the Union in Case 28-CA-23497 has charged that the Respondent has

been engaging in further unfair labor practices as set forth in the National Labor Relations

Act, 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq., herein called the Act. Based thereon, and in order to avoid

unnecessary costs or delays, the Acting General Counsel, by the undersigned, pursuant to

Section 102.33 of the Rules and Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, herein

called the Board, ORDERS that these cases are further consolidated.

These cases having been further consolidated, the Acting General Counsel, by

the undersigned, pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Act and Section 102.15 of the Board’s Rules

2

and Regulations, issues this Order Further Consolidating Cases, Second Consolidated

Complaint and Notice of Hearing and alleges as follows:



date.


February 4, 2011, and a copy was served by regular mail on the Respondent on

February 8, 2011.

(c) The charge in Case 28-CA-23401 was filed by the Union on

March 14, 2011, and a copy was served by regular mail on the Respondent on the same date.

(d) The charge in Case 28-CA-23497 was filed by the Union on

May 6, 2011, and a copy was served by regular mail on the Respondent on May 9, 2011.

2. (a) At all material times the Respondent, a Maryland corporation,



services.







3









Barrick Neill - Vice President of Operations Sandi Claridge - Director of Human Relations Vasti Amaro - Director of Operations Kevin Healy - Vice President Labor Relations Larry Kucera - General Manager

(b) At all material times the Respondent’s counsels have served as


Section 2(l3) of the Act.




All full-time and part-time bus operators and part-time road supervisors operating at or out of the Respondent’s facilities, excluding all other employees, office clerical employees, full-time road supervisors, lead operators, dispatchers, dispatch supervisors, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.




4


recent of which was effective from July 1, 2005 to June 30, 2010, herein called the

Agreement, which was extended by agreement of the parties to October 3, 2010.



6. (a) On or about March 3, 2011, the Respondent, by its counsel, at

the offices of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Services, threatened employees that

further bargaining over the Respondent’s severance proposal would be futile, by telling them

that the Respondent would unilaterally implement its severance proposal when impasse was

reached.

(b) On or about March 11, 2011, the Respondent, by Barrick Neill,

at Respondent’s facility, threatened employees by informing them that the Respondent had

stopped collecting union dues from their paychecks.



to have been found in employee Miguel Saavedra’s specimen sample.



(1) a copy of any and all infraction notices issued to any employee for violating the drug and alcohol policy; and, (2) a copy of the minutes for all hearings conducted for violations of the drug and alcohol policy.

5

(c) The information requested by the Union, as described in




and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it as described in

paragraph 7(a).


failed and refused to furnish the Union with the information requested by it as described in

paragraph 7(b).

(f) On or about December 1, 2010, the Respondent implemented its


(g) (1) In or about March 2011, a more precise date being

unknown to the Acting General Counsel, the Respondent changed the terms of the Agreement

by ceasing to collect from employee paychecks and remit to the Union the employees’ union

dues.

(2) Since in or about April 2011, a more precise date being

unknown to the Acting General Counsel, the Respondent delayed paying Unit employees for their

unused floating holidays.

(3) The Respondent engaged in the conduct described above

in paragraph 7(g)(1) and 7(g)(2), because the Unit employees formed, joined or assisted the

Union and engaged in concerted activities, and to discourage employees from engaging in

these activities.

(h) On or about April 15, 2011, the Respondent implemented its


6

(i) The subjects set forth above in paragraphs 7(f), 7(g), and 7(h)



(j) The Respondent engaged in the conduct described above in

paragraphs 7(f) through 7(h), without affording the Union an opportunity to bargain with the



been reached on bargaining for a successor-agreement as a whole.

(k) Since on or about February 25, 2011, the Respondent has

refused to arbitrate a grievance filed by the Union relating to Miguel Saavedra.

(l) In or about October 2010, a more precise date being unknown



(m) Since on or about October 10, 2010, the Respondent has refused

to arbitrate any grievances related to the Unit.

(n) On or about March 15, 2011, the Respondent, by Barrick Neill,




(o) From January 2010 through June 2010, the Respondent refused

to meet with the Union for purposes of negotiating a successor collective-bargaining

agreement to the Agreement.

7

(p) At various times during the months of June 2010 through

April 2011, the Respondent and the Union met for purposes of negotiating a successor

collective-bargaining agreement to the Agreement.

(q) During the period described above in paragraph 7(p), the

Respondent engaged in the following conduct:









agreement;






(r) By its overall conduct, including the conduct described above in

paragraphs 6 and 7(a) through 7(q), the Respondent has failed and refused to bargain in good

faith with the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Unit.

8


been interfering with, restraining, and coercing employees in the rights guaranteed in Section

7 of the Act in violation of Section 8(a)(1) of the Act.

9. By the conduct described above in paragraphs 7(g)(1) through 7(g)(3),

the Respondent has been discriminating in regard to the hire or tenure or terms and conditions

of employment of its employees, thereby discouraging membership in a labor organization in

violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the Act.








above in paragraphs 6 through 10, the Acting General Counsel seeks an order requiring the

Respondent to: (1) bargain with the Union for not less than 24 hours per month for at least six

hours per session, or another schedule mutually agreed to by the parties, until a complete

collective-bargaining agreement or good-faith impasse is reached; (2) prepare a written

bargaining report every 15 days and submit them to the Regional Director for Region 28 and

also serve the reports on the Union with an opportunity to reply; and (3) rescind the

Respondent’s various unilateral changes and restoration of the status-quo ante. The Acting

General Counsel further seeks such other relief as may be appropriate to remedy the unfair

labor practices alleged.

9

ANSWER REQUIREMENT



be received by this office on or before July 14, 2011, or postmarked on or before

July 13, 2011. Unless filed electronically in a pdf format, the Respondent should file an

original and four copies of the answer with this office.

















filing.

10





NOTICE OF HEARING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on July 25, 2011, at 1:00 p.m. (local time), in








Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 30th day of June 2011. /s/ Cornele A. Overstreet Cornele A. Overstreet, Regional Director Attachments

Form NLRB-877



Cases 28-CA-23249 28-CA-23358 28-CA-23401 28-CA-23497 DATE OF MAILING: June 30, 2011

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE OF: ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES, SECOND CONSOLIDATED


I, the undersigned employee of the National Labor Relations Board, being duly sworn, depose and say that on the date indicated above I served the above-entitled document(s) by postpaid certified mail upon the following persons, addressed to them at the following addresses: Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 720 East Butterfield Road, Suite 300 Lombard, IL 60148 7001 0320 0000 2489 7234 Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, AZ 85009 7001 0320 0000 2489 7227





/s/ Katherine Stanley Subscribed and sworn to before me this 30th day of June 2011.





NOTICE

Cases: 28-CA-23249

28-CA-23358 28-CA-23401 28-CA-23497

The issuance of the notice of formal hearing in this case does not mean that the matter cannot be disposed of by agreement of the parties. On the contrary, it is the policy of this office to encourage voluntary adjustments. The examiner or attorney assigned to the case will be pleased to receive and to act promptly upon your suggestions or comments to this end. An agreement between the parties, approved by the Regional Director, would serve to cancel the hearing. However, unless otherwise specifically ordered, the hearing will be held at the date, hour and place indicated. Postponements will not be granted unless good and sufficient grounds are shown and the following requirements are met: (1) The request must be in writing. An original and two copies must be filed with the Regional Director when appropriate



Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 720 East Butterfield Road, Suite 300 Lombard, IL 60148 Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, AZ 85009




Exhibit 8

UNITED STATES OF AMERICABEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

REGION 28

VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC.(PHOENIX DIVISION)

and Cases 28-CA-2324928-CA-2335828-CA-2340128-CA-23497

AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION,LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO

NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND COMPLAINT

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at the opening of the hearing in the above

captioned matter on July 25, 2011, Counsel for the Acting General Counsel will move to amend

the Second Consolidated Complaint, dated June 30, 2011, ("Complaint"), to add the following to

paragraph 4(a) of the Complaint:

Dave Todd - Operations Manager

Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 14 1h day of July, 2011.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ John T. Giannopoulos

John T. GiannopoulosCounsel for the General CounselNational Labor Relations Board, Region 282600 North Central Ave., Suite 1800Phoenix, AZ 85004Telephone: 602-640-2123Facsimile: 602-640-2178

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

I, the undersigned employee of the National Labor Relations Board, being duly sworn, depose

and say that on the date indicated above I served the foregoing by E-mail and regular mail to

following addresses:

James Foster, Esq.McMahon-Berger2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200St. Louis, MO 63131-3039E-Mail: [email protected]

Michael Keenan, Esq.Ward, Keenan & Barrett, PC3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720Phoenix, AZ 85012E-Mail: rn keen an @ward kee nan ba rrett. co ni

Joseph M. Burns, Esq.Jacobs, Burns, Orlove, Stanton & Hernandez122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1720Chicago, IL 60603E-Mail: 'burns@*bosh.corn

Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 14 1h day of July 2011.

/s/ John T. GiannopoulosJohn T. GiannopoulosCounsel for the Acting General Counsel

2

Exhibit 9


REGION 28


ACTING GENERAL COUNSEL’S SECOND NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND COMPLAINT

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that at the commencement of the hearing in the

above captioned matter on July 25, 2011, Counsel for the Acting General Counsel will move

to amend the Second Consolidated Complaint, dated June 30, 2011, (“Complaint”), as

follows:

1. Add the following to paragraph 4(a) of the Complaint:

Dave Todd - Operations Manager

2. Substitute the following for paragraph 5(a) of the Complaint:

The following employees of the Respondent, herein called the Unit, constitute

a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning

of Section 9(b) of the Act:

2

All full-time and part-time operators employed by the Respondent at its Phoenix facility, excluding all other employees, office clerical employees, guards, and supervisors, as defined in the Act.

Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 20th day of July 2011.

Respectfully submitted, /s/ John T. Giannopoulos John T. Giannopoulos Counsel for the General Counsel National Labor Relations Board, Region 28 2600 North Central Ave., Suite 1800 Phoenix, AZ 85004 Telephone: 602-640-2123 Facsimile: 602-640-2178

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of ACTING GENERAL COUNSEL’S SECOND NOTICE OF INTENT TO AMEND COMPLAINT in VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION), Cases 28-CA-23249 et al. was served by E-Mail, Facsimile and regular mail on this 20th day of July 2011, on the following: James Foster, Esq. McMahon-Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039 E-Mail: [email protected]

Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 720 East Butterfield Road, Suite 300 Lombard, IL 60148 Facsimile: 630-214-1049 Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. – Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, AZ 85009 Facsimile: 602-229-4734

Michael Keenan, Esq. Ward, Keenan & Barrett, PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012 E-Mail: [email protected] Joseph M. Burns, Esq. Jacobs, Burns, Orlove, Stanton & Hernandez 122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1720 Chicago, IL 60603 E-Mail: [email protected]


/s/ John T. Giannopoulos John T. Giannopoulos Counsel for the General Counsel National Labor Relations Board, Region 28 2600 North Central Ave., Suite 1800 Phoenix, AZ 85004 Telephone: 602-640-2123 Facsimile: 602-640-2178

Exhibit 10

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENTNATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

IN THE MATTER OF Veolia Transportation Services, Inc., (Phoenix Division)Cases: 28-CA-23249; 28-CA-23358; 28-CA-23401; 28-CA-23497

The undersigned Charged Party and the undersigned Charging Party, in settlement of the above matters, and subject to theapproval of the Regional Director for the National Labor Relations Board, HEREBY AGREE AS FOLLOWS:

POSTING OF NOTICE - Upon approval of this Agreement and receipt of the Notices from the Region, which may includeNotices in more than one language as deemed appropriate by the Regional Director, the Charged Party will post immediatelyin conspicuous places in and about its plant/office, including all places where notices to employeesimembers are customarilyposted, and maintain for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting, copies of the attached Notice (and versions in otherlanguages as deemed appropriate by the Regional Director) made a part hereof, said Notices to be signed by a responsibleofficial of the Charged Party and the date of actual posting to be shown thereon.

In addition to physical posting of paper notices, notices shall be distributed electronically, such as by e-mail, posting on anintranet or an internet site, or other electronic means, if the Charged Party customarily communicates with its employees ormembers by such means. The electronic posting shall remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date it was originallyposted. The Charged Party will e-mail the Region's Compliance Officer at Miguel. Rodriguezenlrb.gov with a link to theelectronic posting location on the same day as the posting. In the event that passwords or other log-on information isrequired to access the electronic posting, the Charged Party agrees to provide such access information to the Region'sCompliance Officer. If the Notice is distributed via e-mail, the charged party will forward a copy of the e-mail distributed tothe Regional Compliance Officer.

COMPLIANCE WITH NOTICE - The Charged Party will comply with all the terms and provisions of said Notice.

By entering in to this Agreement, the Charged Party does not admit the commission of any unfair labor practice.

SCOPE OF THE AGREEMENT - This Agreement settles only the allegations in the above-captioned case(s), and does notconstitute a settlement of any other case(s) or matters. It does not preclude persons from filing charges, the GeneralCounsel from prosecuting complaints, or the Board and the courts from finding violations with respect to matters whichprecede the date of the approval of this Agreement regardless of whether such matters are known to the General Counsel orare readily discoverable. The General Counsel reserves the right to use the evidence obtained in the inveitigation andprosecution of the above-captioned case(s) for any relevant purpose In the litigation of this or any other case(s), and a judge,the Board and the courts may make findings of fact and/or conclusions of law with respect to said evidence.

REFUSAL TO ISSUE COMPLAINT - In the event the Charging Party fails or refuses to become a party to this Agreement,and if in the Regional Director's discretion it will effectuate the policies of the National Labor Relations Act, the RegionalDirector shall decline to issue a Complaint herein (or a new Complaint if one has been withdrawn pursuant to the terms ofthis Agreement), and this Agreement shall be between the Charged Party and the undersigned Regional Director. A reviewof such action may be obtained pursuant to Section 102.19 of the Rules and Regulations of the Board If a request for sameis filed within 14 days thereof. This Agreement shall be null and void if the General Counsel does not sustain the RegionalDirector's action in the event of a review. Approval of this Agreement by the Regional Director shall constitute withdrawal ofany Complaint(s) and Notice of Hearing heretofore issued in the above captioned case(s), as well as any answer(s) filed inresponse.

AUTHORIZATION TO PROVIDE COMPLIANCE INFORMATION AND NOTICES DIRECTLY TO CHARGED PARTY.Counsel for the Charged Party authorizes the Regional Office to forward the cover letter describing the general 6xpectationsand instructions to achieve compliance, a conformed settlement, original notices and a certification of posting directly to theCharged Party. If such authorization is granted, Counsel will be simultaneously served with a courtesy cdpy of these

m reYes No

niti Is Initials

P FO ANCEE - Performance by the Charged Party with the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall commenceim tely after the Agreement is approved by the Regional Director, or if the Charging Party does not enter into thisAgreement, performance shall commence immediately upon receipt by the Charged Party of notice that no review has beenrequested or that the General Counsel has sustained the Regional Director.

The Charged Party agrees that in case of non-compliance with any of the terms of this Settlement Agreement by theCharged Party, and after 14 days notice from the Regional Director of the National Labor Relations Board Of such non-compliance without remedy by the Charged Party, the Regional Director will reissue the complaint previously issued onJune 30, 2011, in the instant cases, with the addition of the amendments thereto, as further set forth in the Acting GeneralCounsel's Second Notice of Intent to Amend Complaint, dated July 20, 2011. Thereafter, the General Counsel may file a

L37 74 t

motion for default judgment with the Board on the allegations of the complaint, as amended. The Charged Partyunderstands and agrees that the allegations of the aforementioned complaint, as amended, will be deemed admitted and itsAnswer to such complaint, and amendments thereto, will be considered withdrawn. The only issue that may be r ised beforethe Board is whether the Charged Party defaulted on the terms of this Settlement Agreement. The Board may tfien, withoutnecessity of trial or any other proceeding, find all allegations of the complaint, as amended, to be true and mak6 findings offact and conclusions of law consistent with those allegations adverse to the Charged Party, on all issues raised by thepleadings. The Board may then issue an order providing a full remedy for the violations found as Is customary to remedysuch violations. The parties further agree that the U.S. Court of Appeals Judgment may be entered enforcing the Board orderex parte, after service or attempted service upon Charged Party/Respondent at the last address provided to theGeneral Counsel.

NOTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE - The undersigned parties to this Agreement will each notify the Regional Director inwriting what steps the Charged Party has taken to comply herewith. Such notification shall be given within 5 days, and againafter 60 days, from the date of the approval of this Agreement. In the event the Charging Party does not enter into thisAgreement, initial notice shall be given within 5 days after notification from the Regional Director that no review has beenrequested or that the General Counsel has sustained the Regional Director. Contingent upon compliance with the terms andprovisions hereof, no further action shall be taken in the above captioned case(s).

Veolia Transportation Services Amalgamated Transit Union, LocalInc., (Phoenix Division) 1433, AFL-CIOBy: ame an itle Date By Name and Title Date

2Ac mmen d By: Dat App Y: Date

1::I 3 1- Regional DirJ nGi opoulos, Attorney ector

[to be inserted on standard Board Notice Letterhead] Cases: 28-CA-2324928-CA-2335828-CA-2340128-CA-23497

FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO:

Form, join or assist a unionChoose representatives to bargain with us on your behalfAct together with other employees for your benefit and protectionChoose not to engage in any of these protected activities.

WE WILL NOT do anything that interferes with these rights. More particularly,

WE WILL NOT refuse to recognize and bargain with AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL NO.1433 (Union) as the exclusive bargaining representative of the employees in the following appropriate unit(Unit):

Ail full-time and part-time operators employed by the Employer at its Phoenix facility,excluding all other employees, road supervisors, dispatchers, schedulers, payrollemployees, office clerical employees, guards, and supervisors, as defined by the Act.

WE WILL NOT refuse to bargain collectively with the Union, by engaging in bad-faith bargaining or byengaging in surface bargaining, with no intention of entering into any final or binding collective-bargainingagreement

WE WILL NOT threaten you by telling you that we will stop collecting Union dues from your paychecks, orconvey to you that further bargaining with the Union over a severance package would be futile.

WE WILL NOT unilaterally, without giving the Union prior notice or affording it an opportunity to bargain,and in retaliation for your exercising your rights under Section 7 of the Act: (1) change the terms andconditions of your employment by ceasing the collection of Union dues from your paychecks-, or (2) delayin paying you for your unused floating holidays.

WE WILL NOT unilaterally, without giving the Union prior notice or affording it an opportunity to bargain,change our sick leave accrual policies, offer you a one-time severance package, or bypass the Union anddeal directly with employees in the Unit.

WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to provide relevant information requested by the Union for the purpose ofcarrying out its representational duties, or fail and refuse to arbitrate grievances after the expiration of ourcollective-bargaining agreement involving rights which accrued or vested during the term of the collective-bargaining agreement.

WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce you in the exercise of therights guaranteed you by Section 7 of the Act.

WE WILL meet with the Union at reasonable times and periods of time and bargain with them in goodfaith with them for a successor agreement.

WE HAVE restored the status quo terms and conditions of employment as they existed prior to ourunilateral changes and continue them in effect unless and until the Union states its desire not to bargainover a change, a collective-bargaining agreement is reached with the Union, or a lawful impasse isreached in bargaining.

WE WILL arbitrate the grievance related to Miguel Saavedra, involving rights which accrued or vestedduring the term of the collective-bargaining agreement.

WE HAVE made Unit employees whole for any loss of earnings or other benefits they may have suffered asa result of our unilateral changes, and provided the Union with the information that it requested from us thatis necessary for, and relevant to, the Union's performance of its function as exclusive colleAve-bargainingrepresentative of the Unit.

VEOLIA TRANS ORTATION SERICES, INC.HOENIX DI ION)

Dated: By:

HOENIX

D'

I N)

(Re e tati

w,The National Labor Relations Board is an independent Federal agen y created 1 35 to rce the National Labor Relations Act.We conduct secret-ballot elections to determine whether employees nt i repre ntation and we investigate nd remedy unfairlabor practices by employers and unions. To find out more about your rights under the Act and how to file a charg4 or election petition,you may speak confidentially to any agent with the Board's Phoenix Regional Office set forth below. You may also obtain informationfrom the Board's website: www nlrb gov

2600 North Central Avenue - Suite 1800Phoenix, Arizona 85004-3099 - Telephone: (602) 640-2160

Hours of Operation: Monday through Friday, 8-15 a.m. to 4:45 p m

2

Exhibit 11

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Region 28

2600 North Central Avenue, Suite 1800

Phoenix, AZ 85004-3099

Telephone: (602) 640-2161

Facsimile: (602) 640-2178

Email: www.nlrb.gov

RESIDENT OFFICES 421 Gold Avenue, SW - Suite 310 P.O. Box 567 Albuquerque, NM 87103-0567 Telephone: (505) 248-5125 Facsimile: (505) 248-5134 600 Las Vegas Boulevard South - Suite 400 Las Vegas, NV 89101-6637 Telephone: (702) 388-6417 Facsimile: (702) 388-6248

September 13, 2011 Mr. Barrick Neill Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. (Phoenix Division) 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, AZ 85009-6948

Re: Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. (Phoenix Division)

Cases 28-CA-023249, 28-CA-023358, 28-CA-023401 and 28-CA-023497

Dear Mr. Neill: Enclosed is a copy of the unilateral Settlement Agreement in the above matter which was approved on August 25, 2011. This letter discusses what the Employer needs to do to comply with the Agreement.

Post Notice: Enclosed are twelve (12) original Notices to Employees. In compliance with the unilateral Settlement Agreement, a responsible official of the Employer, not the Employer’s attorney, must sign and date the Notices before posting them. The Notices should be conspicuously displayed where notices to employees are customarily posted for 60 consecutive days at the Employer’s place of business in Phoenix, Arizona. The Employer must take reasonable steps to ensure that the Notices are not altered, defaced or covered by other material. If additional Notices are required, please let me know. During the posting period, a member of the Regional Office staff may visit the Employer to inspect the Notices. In addition to physical posting of paper notices, notices shall be distributed electronically, such as by email, posting on an intranet or an internet site, or other electronic means, if the Charged Party customarily communicates with its employees [members] by such means. The electronic posting shall remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date it was originally posted. The Charged Party will e-mail the Region’s Compliance Officer @ [email protected] with a link to the electronic posting location on the same day as

Cases 28-CA-23249, et al. - 2 - September 13, 2011 the posting. In the event that passwords or other log-on information is required to access the electronic posting, the Charged Party agrees to provide such access information to the Region’s Compliance Officer. If the Notice is distributed via e-mail, the Charged Party will forward a copy of the e-mail distributed to the Region’s Compliance Officer. Certification of Compliance: A Certification of Compliance form is also enclosed. This form should be completed and returned by not later than September 27, 2011, along with two (2) signed and dated original Notices to the Las Vegas Resident Office, at the address listed above.

Remedial Actions: Please read all the terms of the unilateral Settlement Agreement and Notice carefully, as you will be expected to comply with all such provisions. If you have questions or I can assist you, please contact me at (602) 640-2146, or Compliance Assistant Dawn M. Moore at (702) 388-6417.

Closing the Case: When all the affirmative terms of the unilateral Settlement Agreement have been fully complied with and there are no reported violations of its negative terms, you will be notified that the case has been closed on compliance. Timely receipt of the signed and dated Notice to Employees and the Certification of Posting will assist us in closing the case in a timely manner.

Very truly yours,

Miguel Rodriguez Miguel Rodriguez Compliance Officer

Enclosures: Copy of Settlement Agreement Notices to Employees Certification of Compliance

cc: James N. Foster Jr., Attorney at Law McMahon & Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 Saint Louis, MO 63131-3039 Veolia Transportation Service, Inc. Phoenix Division 720 East Butterfield Road, Suite 300 Lombard, IL 60148-5601 Veolia Transportation Service, Inc. Phoenix Division 2015 Spring Road, Suite 750 Oak Brook, IL 60523-3914

Cases 28-CA-23249, et al. - 3 - September 13, 2011

Gerald Barrett, Attorney at Law Michael J. Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward, Keenan & Barrett, PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012-1994 Amalgamated Transit Union, Local #1433 PO Box 4366 Phoenix, AZ 85030-4366

MR/dmm

Exhibit 12

CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE

1, ve; I , 4 * e*7 S(Name) "(Job Title)

of( 4ame of Company)

swear, under penalty of perjury, that Respondent has undertaken the following steps to comply withthe unilateral Settlement Agreement and Notice to Employees in Cases:

VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENix DIVISION)

Cases 28-CA-023249, 28-CA-023358, 28-CA-023401 and 28-CA-023497

Bargaining. Respondent will meet with the Union at reasonable times and periods of time andbargain with them in good faith for a successor agreement.

Respondent has restored the status quo terms and conditions of employment asthey existed prior to our unilateral changes and continue them in effect unless and until theUnion states its desire not to bargain over a change, a collective-bargaining agreement is reachedwith the Union, or a lawful impasse is reached in bargaining.

Backpay. Respondent has made Unit employees whole for any loss of earnings or otherbenefits they may have suffered as a result of our unilateral changes.

Information Reguest. Respondent has provided the Union with the information it requested ofus that is necessary and relevant to the Union's performance of its function as the exclusivecollective-bargaining representative of the Unit.

Notice Postina. Respondent posted the Notice to Employees as required by the unilateralSettlement Agreement on the dates and at the locations indicated below.

LOCATION DATE POSTED

114q / 1 4 4c

Ze- C=-jK 4 /--h k

Signature: Date:

Exhibit 13

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Region 28

2600 North Central Avenue, Suite 1800

Phoenix, AZ 85004-3099

Telephone: (602) 640-2161

Facsimile: (602) 640-2178

Email: [email protected]

Resident Offices

421 Gold Avenue, SW - Suite 310 P.O. Box 567 Albuquerque, NM 87103-0567 Telephone: (505) 248-5125 Facsimile: (505) 248-5134 600 Las Vegas Boulevard South - Suite 400 Las Vegas, NV 89101-6637 Telephone: (702) 388-6417 Facsimile: (702) 388-6248

January 31, 2012

Mr. James Foster, Jr. VIA EMAIL: [email protected] Attorney at Law McMahon-Berger 2730 N. Ballas Road, Suite 200 P.O. Box 31901 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039 Re: Veolia Transportation Service, Inc. Phoenix Division Cases 28-CA-023249, et al., and Cases 28-CA-068169, et al. Dear Mr. Foster: On August 25, 2011, the Regional Director unilaterally approved the informal Board Settlement Agreement (Agreement) executed by Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. (Charged Party) in Cases 28-CA-023249, 28-CA-023358, 28-CA-023401, and 28-CA-023497. On November 3, 2011, Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1433, AFL-CIO (Union), filed a charge in Case 28-CA-068169, alleging additional bad-faith bargaining and other violations, some of which involve conduct similar to that addressed and encompassed by the terms of the Agreement. The Region fully investigated this charges, and the subsequent charge filed by the Union in Case 28-CA-071493, and found merit to allegations made in those charges. The investigation of the recently filed charges, as well as the investigation into your client’s compliance with the Agreement shows that your client has not complied with all terms of the Agreement. As a result, this is to notify you, to the degree that it has not been communicated to previously, that your client is in non-compliance with the Agreement. Such non-compliance triggers the default language set forth in the Agreement. Enclosed are copies of a proposed Formal Settlement Stipulation and Notice to Employees which addresses all allegations in the above-captioned matters including the charges subject

to the Agreement and those other charges recently filed. Please review this proposal, and, if your client elects to enter into this Stipulation, please sign and date the Stipulation, initial the Notice to Employees, and return both documents to me by the close of business today. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to call me. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.

Very truly yours, /s/ Mary Davidson Mary Davidson

Field Attorney

Enclosures: Formal Settlement Agreement and Notice

Exhibit 14


REGION 28

VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and Cases 28-CA-068169 28-CA-071493 AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO

ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES, CONSOLIDATED COMPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING

Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1433, AFL-CIO, herein called the Union,

has charged in Cases 28-CA-068169 and 28-CA-071493 that Veolia Transportation

Services, Inc. (Phoenix Division), herein called the Respondent, has been engaging in unfair

labor practices as set forth in the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 151, et seq.,

herein called the Act. Based thereon, and in order to avoid unnecessary costs or delay, the

Acting General Counsel, by the undersigned, pursuant to Section 102.33 of the Rules and

Regulations of the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, ORDERS that

these cases are consolidated.

These cases having been consolidated, the Acting General Counsel, by the

undersigned, pursuant to Section 10(b) of the Act and Section 102.15 of the Board’s Rules

and Regulations, issues this Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Complaint and Notice

of Hearing and alleges as follows:

2



date.


December 28, 2011, and a copy was served by regular mail on the Respondent on the same

date.

(c) The amended charge in Case 28-CA-071493 was filed by the

Union on January 27, 2012, and a copy was served by regular mail on the Respondent on the

January 30, 2012.

2. (a) At all material times the Respondent, an Arizona corporation,


facility, has been engaged in the business of operating transportation services, including bus

services.











3





Barrick Neill - Vice President of Operations Sandi Claridge - Director of Human Relations Edward Bednarczyk - Director of Transportation

Tom Hock - Vice President, Labor Relations Jack Besch - Finance Director Jack Pisano - General Manager

(b) At all material times the Respondent’s counsel have served as


Section 2(13) of the Act.




All full time and part-time operators employed by the Respondent at its Phoenix facility; excluding all other employees, office clerical employees, guards, and supervisors, as defined in the Act.





recent of which is effective from July 1, 2005, to June 30, 2010, herein called the Agreement,

which was extended by agreement of the parties to October 3, 2010.

(c) At all times since in or about 2001, based on Section 9(a) of the

Act, the Union has been the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Unit.

4

6. (a) On or about December 1, 2010, the Respondent implemented its


(b) In or about March 2011, a more precise date being unknown to

the Acting General Counsel, the Respondent changed the terms of the Agreement by ceasing

to collect from employee paychecks and remit to the Union the employees’ union dues.

(c) Since in or about April 2011, a more precise date being

unknown to the Acting General Counsel, the Respondent delayed paying Unit employees for

their unused floating holidays.

(d) On or about April 15, 2011, the Respondent implemented its


(e) The subjects set forth above in paragraphs 6(a) through 6(d)



(f) The Respondent engaged in the conduct described above in

paragraphs 6(a) through 6(e) without affording the Union an opportunity to bargain with the



been reached on bargaining for a successor agreement as a whole.

(g) In or about October 2010, a more precise date being unknown



(h) On or about March 15, 2011, the Respondent, by Barrick Neill,


5



(i) During the period from in or about January 2010, through in or

about June 2010, the Respondent refused to meet with the Union for purposes of negotiating a

successor collective-bargaining agreement to the Agreement.

(j) At various times during the period from in or about June 2010,

through in or about April 2011, the Respondent and the Union met for purposes of negotiating

a successor collective-bargaining agreement to the Agreement.

(k) During the period described above in paragraph 6(j), the

Respondent:









agreement;





6


(l) By its overall conduct, including the conduct described above in

paragraphs 6(a) through 6(k), the Respondent failed and refused to bargain in good faith with

the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Unit.

(m) The acts and conduct described above in paragraphs 6(a)

through 6(l), as well as other acts and conduct of the Respondent alleged as violations of

Section 8(a)(1), (3), and (5) of the Act, were the subject of charges filed by the Union in

Cases 28-CA-023249, 28-CA-023358, 28-CA-023401 and 28-CA-023497.

(n) On June 30, 2011, the Acting General Counsel, by the

undersigned, issued the Second Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing in

Cases 28-CA-023249, 28-CA-023358, 28-CA-023401 and 28-CA-023497, which was subject

to subsequent motions to amend by the Acting General Counsel, and which alleged that the

Respondent violated Section 8(a)(1), (3), and (5) of the Act as described above in

paragraphs 6(a) through 6(l).

(o) On July 25, 2011, the Respondent entered into a Board

Settlement Agreement in Cases 28-CA-023249, 28-CA-023358, 28-CA-023401 and

28-CA-023497, herein called the Settlement Agreement, which, if its terms were fulfilled,

would have provided a remedy for the unfair labor practices described above in paragraphs

6(a) through 6(n).

(p) On August 25, 2011, after the Union refused to enter into the

Settlement Agreement, the undersigned approved the Settlement Agreement.

7

(q) By entering into the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent

agreed to cease and desist from certain and like or related acts and conduct, including, but not

limited to, the following:

(1) refusing to recognize the Union as the exclusive

bargaining representative of Unit employees;

(2) refusing to bargain collectively with the Union;

(3) engaging in bad-faith or surface bargaining with no

intention of entering into any final or binding collective-bargaining agreement;

(3) unilaterally, without giving the Union prior notice or

affording it an opportunity to bargain, changing the terms and conditions of Unit employees;

(4) failing or refusing to provide relevant information

requested by the Union for the purpose of carrying out its representational duties; and

(5) failing or refusing to arbitrate grievances after the

expiration of the Agreement involving rights which accrued or vested during the term of the

Agreement

(r) By entering into the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent

agreed to take certain affirmative acts, including, but not limited to, the following:

(1) meet with the Union at reasonable times and periods of

time and bargain with them in good faith for a successor agreement; and,

(2) restore the status quo terms and conditions of

employment as they existed prior to the Respondent’s unilateral changes and continue them in

effect unless and until the Union states its desire not to bargain over a change, a collective-

bargaining agreement is reached with the Union, or a lawful impasse is reached in bargaining.

8

(s) By entering into the Settlement Agreement, the Respondent

agreed that in the case of its non-compliance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the

allegations set forth in the Second Consolidated Complaint described above paragraph 6(n)

would be deemed admitted and the Respondent’s answer to such complaint would be

considered withdrawn; that the only issue that may be raised before the Board would be

whether the Respondent defaulted on the terms of said Settlement Agreement; that the Board

may, on the pleadings, find that the allegations of the complaint are true and provide a full

remedy; and that a U.S. Court of Appeals judgment may be entered, enforcing the Board

order, ex parte.

(t) Based on the acts and conduct described below in paragraph 7,

the undersigned has initiated steps provided for in the Settlement Agreement’s default

provision which will, absent prompt resolution by the Respondent, result in the filing of a

motion for default judgment with the Board on the allegations described above in paragraph 6.

7. (a) At various times during the period from in or about June 2011,

through in or about October 2011, the Respondent and the Union met for purposes of

collective bargaining with respect to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of

employment of Unit employees, including the terms of a successor agreement to the

Agreement.

(b) During the period described above in paragraph 7(a), the

Respondent:

(1) resubmitted proposals to the Union, including its Best

and Final Company Proposal on August 9, 2011, which proposals included no, or

9

insubstantial, changes to its prior proposals, which were the subject of the Second

Consolidated Complaint and Settlement Agreement referred to above in paragraph 6; and


(c) On or about September 15, 2011, the Respondent, during

bargaining:

(1) declared an impasse in negotiations; and

(2) declared its intent to implement its bargaining proposal,

including a one-time severance package for existing employees, by on or about mid-

October 2011 or November 2011.

(d) On or about November 28, 2011, the Respondent implemented

its bargaining proposal, including a one-time severance package for existing employees.

(e) The subjects set forth above in paragraphs 7(c)(2) and 7(d)

relate to the wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment of Unit employees

and are mandatory subjects for the purposes of collective bargaining.

(f) The Respondent engaged in the conduct described above in

paragraphs 7(c)(2) and 7(d) without first bargaining with the Union to a good-faith impasse

and at a time when no overall good faith impasse had been reached on bargaining for a

successor agreement.

(g) On or about December 1, 2011, the Respondent, by Barrick

Neill, at Respondent’s facility, bypassed the Union and dealt directly with its employees in

the Unit by informing them that the Respondent had implemented a one-time severance

package for existing employees and of the requirements to receive the one-time severance.

10

(h) By its overall conduct, including the conduct described above in

paragraphs 6(a) through 6(k) and 7(a) through 7(g), the Respondent has failed and refused to

bargain in good faith with the Union as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of

the Unit.








above in paragraphs 7 and 8, the Acting General Counsel seeks an order requiring the

Respondent to: (1) bargain in good faith on request of the Union within 15 days of a Board

Order; (2) bargain on request for a minimum of 15 hours a week until an agreement or lawful

impasse is reached or until the parties agree to a respite in bargaining; (3) prepare written

progress reports every 15 days and submit them to the Regional Director for Region 28 and

also serve the reports on the Union with an opportunity to reply; and (4) make whole

employee negotiators for any earnings lost while attending bargaining sessions; and (5) on the

request of the Union, rescind the Respondent’s various unilateral changes and restore the

status-quo ante. The Acting General Counsel further seeks such other relief as may be

appropriate to remedy the unfair labor practices alleged.

11

ANSWER REQUIREMENT



be received by this office on or before February 14, 2012, or postmarked on or before

February 13, 2012. Unless filed electronically in a pdf format, Respondent should file an

original and four copies of the answer with this office.

















filing.

12





NOTICE OF HEARING

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on April 3, 2012, at 9:00 a.m. (local time), in








Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 31st day of January 2012. Cornele A. Overstreet, Regional Director Attachments

Form NLRB-877


VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO

Cases 28-CA-068169 28-CA-071493 DATE OF MAILING: January 31, 2012

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE OF: ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES, CONSOLIDATED


I, the undersigned employee of the National Labor Relations Board, being duly sworn, depose and say that on the date indicated above I served the above-entitled document(s) by postpaid certified mail upon the following persons, addressed to them at the following addresses: Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. - Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Tempe, AZ 85281-2802 7010 1060 0000 1441 4508

James N. Foster Jr., Attorney at Law McMahon Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039

Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1433, AFL-CIO, CLC 11024 North 28th Drive, Suite 185 Phoenix, AZ 85029

Michael J. Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward Keenan & Barrett PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012-1994


/s/ Iliana Ferrance Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31st day of January 2012.

DESIGNATED AGENT /s/ Kay Davis




NOTICE

Cases: 28-CA-068169

28-CA-071493 The issuance of the notice of formal hearing in this case does not mean that the matter cannot be disposed of by agreement of the parties. On the contrary, it is the policy of this office to encourage voluntary adjustments. The examiner or attorney assigned to the case will be pleased to receive and to act promptly upon your suggestions or comments to this end. An agreement between the parties, approved by the Regional Director, would serve to cancel the hearing. However, unless otherwise specifically ordered, the hearing will be held at the date, hour and place indicated. Postponements will not be granted unless good and sufficient grounds are shown and the following requirements are met: (1) The request must be in writing. An original and two copies must be filed the Regional Director when appropriate



Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. - Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Tempe, AZ 85281-2802

James N. Foster Jr., Attorney at Law McMahon Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039

Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1433, AFL-CIO, CLC 11024 North 28th Drive, Suite 185 Phoenix, AZ 85029

Michael J. Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward Keenan & Barrett PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012-1994

Exhibit 15

Date post:	03-Jan-2016
Category:	Documents
Upload:	darwinbondgraham
View:	77 times
Download:	1 times