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 COUNSELS 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 Boards Rules and Regulations (the Boards 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
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 in certain unfair labor practices affecting commerce set forth and defined in the Act. (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 in certain unfair labor practices affecting commerce set forth and defined in the Act. 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 Boards 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 (Respondents 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 Boards 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
Consolidated Complaint (Respondents 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 Boards 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 (Respondents 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.
(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 Respondents unilateral changes; provide information requested by the Union; arbitrate a grievance; and restore the status quo as it existed prior to Respondents 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 Agreements terms, and the following provision addressing the event of Respondents 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
forth in the Acting General Counsels 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 28s Compliance Officer (the
Compliance Officer), on behalf of the General Counsel, sent a package of information to Respondent and Respondents 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 Respondents 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
Complaint, and had posted the Notice at various locations. A copy of Respondents 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 Respondents 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,
(4)
On November 28, 2011, Respondent
implemented its Final Proposal, including a one-time severance buyout proposal. (e) On January 31, 2012, by letter, a copy of which is attached hereto and
marked as Exhibit 13, the Regional Director, notified Respondents 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 clients 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
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) the Board: In view of the foregoing, the General Counsel respectfully moves that
(1)
Find that Respondents 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 Boards 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: mary.davidson@nlrb.gov
Exhibit 1
FORM EXEMPT UNDER 44 U S C 3512 FORM NLRB-501
(2-08)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
CHARGE AGAINST EMPLOYER
Case
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE Date Filed 11/8/10
28-CA-23249 INSTRUCTIONS: File 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 BROUGHT a Name of Employer Veolia Transportatin Services. Inc-l"hocrux Division
b Tel No (630)382-1092 c Cell No f Fax No (630)214-104() g e-Mail h Number of workers employed 1650
d Address (Street, city, state, and ZIP code) 2015 Spring Rd- Suite 750 Oak Brook. It- 60523
e Employer Representative Greg Wagoner. 114RM
i Type of Establishment (factory, mine, wholesaler,etc) I Identify principal product or service Transportion Public Transportation k The above-named employer has engaged in and is engaging inunfair 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 commerce within 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 is necessary 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 the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
3 Full name of party filing charge (if labororganization,give full name, including local name and number) Amalgamated Transit Union. Local # 1433 4c Address (Street and number, city, state, and ZIP code) P.O. Box 4366 4a Tel No (602)495-9466 4b Cell No (602)663-3801 4d Fax No (602)495-1385 4e e-Mail aftl 1433vicepi-e.,(ei qxcqoll-icc.iict
Phoenix. AZ 85030
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 labor organization) 'Ihe Amalgamated] ransit Union 6. DECLARATION Ideclare that Ihave read the above charge and that the statements are true to the best of my knowledge and belief By Tel No Office, ifany, Cell No Fax No e-Mail Address same as above (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 assist the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) inprocessing unfair labor practice and related proceedings or litigation. The routine uses for the information are fully setforth in the 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 is voluntary; however, failure to supply the information will cause the NLRB to decline to invoke its processes.
(signatureof representativeor person making charge)
A.-L,
(PrintItypename and title or office, ifany)
RECEIVED PHX- AZ NLRB-REGION 28 2011 NOV -8 PM 1: 44
Exhibit 2
FORM EXEMPT UNDER 44 U S C 3512 FORM NLRB-501 (2-08)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE Case Date iled 2/4/11
CHARGE AGAINST EMPLOYER
28-CA-23358 INSTRUCTIONS: File 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 BROUGHT a Name of Employer Veolia Fransportation Services. Inc.. Phoenix Division b Tel No (602)229-4739 c Cell No f Fax No d. Address (Street, city, state, and ZIP code) 2225 W.Lo cr Buckeye Road Phoenix. AZ 85009 e Employer Representative Barrick Neill g e-Mail
h Number of workers employed
1. Identify principal product or service i Type of Establishment (factory, mine, wholesaler,etc Public 'Iransportation Public Transportation in k The above-named employer has engaged in and is engaging 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 commerce within 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 laborpractices) Within the last six months, the above-nanned Employer has discriminated against its employees by, airiong other things, bargaining in bad faith including by engaging in surface bar0aining, refusing to provide infon-nation to the below-named Union pursuant to information requests, direct dealing with the represented employees, engaging in unilateral changes, disparaging the Union, and by failing to renlit dues 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 tile rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.
3 Full name of party filing charge (if labororganization,give full name, including local name and number) Amalgamated Transit Union. Local # 1433 4c Address (Street and number, city, state, and ZIP code) P.O. Box 4366 4a Tel No (602)495-9466 4b Cell No (602)663-3801 4d Fax No (602)495-1385 4e e-Mail alu 1433vicepi-es(( ,q\ c,,Iol'licc-iic(
Phoenix. AZ 85030
5. Full name of national or international labor organization of which it is an affiliate or constituent unit (to be filled inwhen charge is filed by a labor organization) The Amalgamated Transit Union 6 DECLARATION Ideclare that Ihave read the above charle and that the statements are true to the best of my knowledge and belief By (SIgnatureofrep sentative 31pers Infmaklng charge) Michael Cornelius, Vice President (Print/type name and title or office, ifany) 02/04/201 1 (date) Tel No Office, ifany, Cell No Fax No e-Mail
as 4 c above Address same
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 assist the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) inprocessing unfair labor practice and related proceedings or litigation. The routine uses for the information arefully setforth in the 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 is voluntary; however, failure to supply the information will cause the NLRB to decline to invoke its processes.
RECEIVED PHX. AZ NLRB-REGION 28 2017 FEB -4 PM 2: 48
Exhibit 3
03/12/2011
05:1e
60227917
WARDKEENAN
PAGE
02/02
4A U.S.0 35 12 FORM FXEMPT UNDF-11
IWERNET FORM NLR5-501
(2-0a)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NAT10NAL LABOR RELATIONS WARD CHARGE AGAINST EMPLOYER
Case
00 NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE Date Filed 03/14/2011
INSTRUCTIONS: PRO MAOrlplinal wlth NLR13 Reqionak a. Name of Employer
28-CA-23401
Director for the region in which the all!!Ved unfair labor practice occurred or is accurring,
1. EMPLOYER AGAINST WHOM CHARGE IS BR-QUGHT

b- Tel. No.
602-229-4739
Veolia 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 Phoenix, Arizona 85009
Sarrick Neill
g. e-mail
h. Number of workers employed 600+ i, Type of Establishment (factW, mine, wholesaler,eW,) Public Transportation j. Identify principal product or service 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 c4earand condse statement of the facts consiltutingthe 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 labora anization,give full name, Includinglocal name and number) Amalgamated ifransit Union, LocalT433
4a, Address (Stmet and number, city, state, and ZIP code) P.O. Box 4366 Phoenix, AZ 85030
4b. Tel. No. 602-495-9466 4c. Cell No. 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 charge and that the statements are true to the best of my knowledge and belief. Michael J. Keenan, Attorneys (4avnafu icf-represenral"er rion F.king -charge) ("Mype name and Wo or office. ifi2ny) 03(14/2011 (date) Tel. No, 602-279-1717 Office, it any, Cell No.
I declare that I have read the
.y
Fax No- 802-279-8908 e-Mall
Address
Arizona 85012 3838 N. Central, Ste. 1720, Phoenix,
WILLFUL FALSE STATEMENTS ON THIS CHARGE CAN BE PUNISHED BY FINE AND IMPRISONMENT (US. CODE, TITLE 18. SECTION 10011) PRIVACY ACT STATEMENT Sdicitation 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 assist the 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 in the 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 is voluntary, however, f2ilure to supply the information will cause the NLRB to decline to invoke its processes.
RECEIVED PHX, AZ NLRB-REGION 28 2011 MAR 14 PM 1: 45
Exhibit 4
Exhibit 5
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD REGION 28
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO Case 28-CA-23249
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 Respondents facility, has been engaged in the business of operating transportation services including bus services.
(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 Sandi Claridge Vasti Amaro 5. (a) Vice President Director of Human Relations Director of Operations
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 Respondents 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.
(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 Sevadras 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) (2) a copy of any and all infraction notices issued to any employee for violating the drug and alcohol policy; and, 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 Unions 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).
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 Boards 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 Agencys website. In order to file an answer electronically, access the Agencys 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 Agencys website informs users that the Agencys 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 Agencys website was offline or unavailable for some other reason. The Boards 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
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 Boards 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
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL #1433, AFL-CIO AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE OF: Case 28-CA-23249
DATE OF MAILING:
January 31, 2011
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 Amalgamated Transit Union, Local #1433 P.O. Box 4366 Phoenix, AZ 85030 James Foster, Attorney at Law McMahon-Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039
Michael Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward, Keenan & Barrett, PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012
Reporters: Argie Reporting Service

DESIGNATED AGENT /s/ Katherine Stanley /s/ Kathleen Smart
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31st day of January 2011.
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
James Foster, Attorney at Law McMahon-Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039 Michael Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward, Keenan & Barrett, PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012
Exhibit 6
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and Cases 28-CA-23249 28-CA-23358 28-CA-23401
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 Boards Rules and Regulations, issues this Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing and alleges as follows:
1.
(a)
The charge in Case 28-CA-23249 was filed by the Union on
November 8, 2010, and a copy was served by regular mail on the Respondent on the same 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,
with an office and place of business in Phoenix, Arizona, herein called the Respondents facility, has been engaged in the business of operating transportation services including bus services. (b) During the 12-month period ending November 8, 2010, the
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
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 Sandi Claridge Vasti Amaro Kevin Healy Larry Kucera (b) Vice President of Operations Director of Human Relations Director of Operations Vice President Labor Relations General Manager
At all material times the Respondents counsels have served as
the Respondents negotiators and have been agents of the Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(l3) of the Act. 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 Respondents 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. (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 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.
(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) 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 Respondents 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 Respondents facility, threatened employees by informing them that the Respondent had stopped collecting union dues from their paychecks. 7. (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 Saavedras 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 7(a) and 7(b), is necessary for, and relevant to, the Unions 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 7(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 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
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 Respondents 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;
(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) no changes to the proposals; and (7) (r) bargained with no intent of reaching an agreement. resubmitted proposals to the Union with insubstantial or
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. By the conduct described above in paragraph 6, the Respondent has
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.
10.
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. 11. The unfair labor practices of the Respondent described above affect
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) 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 Respondents 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 The Respondent is notified that, pursuant to Sections 102.20 and 102.21 of the Boards Rules and Regulations, it must file an answer to this complaint. The answer must be received by this office on or before May 13, 2011 or postmarked on or before May 12, 2011.
An answer may also be filed electronically through the Agencys 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 Agencys website informs users that the Agencys 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 Agencys website was off-line or unavailable for some other reason. The Boards 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 Boards 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.
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, 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 29th day of April 2011.
10
Form NLRB-877
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL #1433, AFL-CIO 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 James Foster, Attorney at Law McMahon-Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039

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 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
720 East Butterfield Road, Suite 300 Lombard, IL 60148

Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, AZ 85009 Amalgamated Transit Union, Local #1433 512 West Adams, Suite #2 P.O. Box 4366 Phoenix, AZ 85030
James Foster, Attorney at Law McMahon-Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039
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
Exhibit 7
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 Boards Rules
and Regulations, issues this Order Further Consolidating Cases, Second Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing and alleges as follows: 1. (a) The charge in Case 28-CA-23249 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. (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,
with an office and place of business in Phoenix, Arizona, herein called the Respondents facility, has been engaged in the business of operating transportation services including bus services. (b) 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
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act. 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 Sandi Claridge Vasti Amaro Kevin Healy Larry Kucera (b) Vice President of Operations Director of Human Relations Director of Operations Vice President Labor Relations General Manager
At all material times the Respondents counsels have served as
the Respondents negotiators and have been agents of the Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(l3) of the Act. 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 Respondents 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. (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 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. (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) 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 Respondents 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 Respondents facility, threatened employees by informing them that the Respondent had stopped collecting union dues from their paychecks. 7. (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 Saavedras 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 in
paragraphs 7(a) and 7(b), is necessary for, and relevant to, the Unions 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 in paragraph 7(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 in paragraph 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) 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
collective-bargaining proposal regarding a severance package for existing employees.

5
(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(f) through 7(h), without affording the Union an opportunity to bargain with the 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 2010, 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, 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,
at Respondents 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) (2) engaged in regressive bargaining; reopened for negotiations various contract articles that
other terms and conditions of employment; (6) no changes to the proposals; and (7) (r) bargained with no intent of reaching an agreement. resubmitted proposals to the Union with insubstantial or
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. 10. By the conduct described above in paragraph 7, the Respondent has
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) 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; and (3) rescind the Respondents 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 The Respondent is notified that, pursuant to Sections 102.20 and 102.21 of the Boards Rules and Regulations, it must file an answer to this complaint. The answer must 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. An answer may also be filed electronically through the Agencys 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 Agencys website informs users that the Agencys 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 Agencys website was off-line or unavailable for some other reason. The Boards 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 Boards 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. NOTICE OF HEARING PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on July 25, 2011, at 1:00 p.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 30th day of June 2011.
10
Form NLRB-877
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL #1433, AFL-CIO Cases 28-CA-23249 28-CA-23358 28-CA-23401 28-CA-23497
DATE OF MAILING:
June 30, 2011
ORDER CONSOLIDATING CASES, SECOND 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 7234 Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, AZ 85009 7001 0320 0000 2489 7227 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 James Foster, Attorney at Law McMahon-Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039

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 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
720 East Butterfield Road, Suite 300 Lombard, IL 60148

Veolia Transportation Services, Inc. Phoenix Division 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, AZ 85009 Amalgamated Transit Union, Local #1433 512 West Adams, Suite #2 P.O. Box 4366 Phoenix, AZ 85030
James Foster, Attorney at Law McMahon-Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039
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
Exhibit 8
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. 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
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-Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039 E-Mail: foster@mcmalionberyer.com Michael Keenan, Esq. Ward, Keenan & Barrett, PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012 E-Mail: rn keen an @ward kee nan ba rrett. co ni Joseph M. Burns, Esq. Jacobs, Burns, Orlove, Stanton & Hernandez 122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1720 Chicago, IL 60603 E-Mail: 'burns@*bosh.corn
Dated at Phoenix, Arizona, this 14 1h day of July 2011.
/s/ John T. Giannopoulos John T. Giannopoulos Counsel for the Acting General Counsel
Exhibit 9
ACTING GENERAL COUNSELS 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 2. Operations Manager
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:
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 COUNSELS 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: foster@mcmahonberger.com
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: mkeenan@wardkeenanbarrett.com Joseph M. Burns, Esq. Jacobs, Burns, Orlove, Stanton & Hernandez 122 South Michigan Avenue, Suite 1720 Chicago, IL 60603 E-Mail: jburns@jbosh.com
Amalgamated Transit Union, Local #1433 512 West Adams, Suite #2 P.O. Box 4366 Phoenix, AZ 85030
/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 GOVERNMENT NATIONAL 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 the approval 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 include Notices in more than one language as deemed appropriate by the Regional Director, the Charged Party will post immediately in conspicuous places in and about its plant/office, including all places where notices to employeesimembers are customarily posted, and maintain for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting, copies of the attached Notice (and versions in other languages as deemed appropriate by the Regional Director) made a part hereof, said Notices to be signed by a responsible official 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 an intranet or an internet site, or other electronic means, if the Charged Party customarily communicates with its employees or 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 at Miguel. Rodriguezenlrb.gov with a link to the electronic posting location on the same day as 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 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 not constitute a settlement of any other case(s) or matters. It does not preclude persons from filing charges, the General Counsel from prosecuting complaints, or the Board and the courts from finding violations with respect to matters which precede the date of the approval of this Agreement regardless of whether such matters are known to the General Counsel or are readily discoverable. The General Counsel reserves the right to use the evidence obtained in the inveitigation and prosecution 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 Regional Director shall decline to issue a Complaint herein (or a new Complaint if one has been withdrawn pursuant to the terms of this Agreement), and this Agreement shall be between the Charged Party and the undersigned Regional Director. A review of such action may be obtained pursuant to Section 102.19 of the Rules and Regulations of the Board If a request for same is filed within 14 days thereof. This Agreement shall be null and void if the General Counsel does not sustain the Regional Director's action in the event of a review. Approval of this Agreement by the Regional Director shall constitute withdrawal of any Complaint(s) and Notice of Hearing heretofore issued in the above captioned case(s), as well as any answer(s) filed in response. 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 6xpectations and instructions to achieve compliance, a conformed settlement, original notices and a certification of posting directly to the Charged Party. If such authorization is granted, Counsel will be simultaneously served with a courtesy cdpy of these mre Yes No niti Is Initials P FO ANCEE - Performance by the Charged Party with the terms and provisions of this Agreement shall commence im tely after the Agreement is approved by the Regional Director, or if the Charging Party does not enter into this Agreement, performance shall commence immediately upon receipt by the Charged Party of notice that no review has been requested 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 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 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
L37
74
motion for default judgment with the Board on the allegations of the complaint, as amended. 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 r ised before the Board is whether the Charged Party defaulted on the terms of this Settlement Agreement. The Board may tfien, without necessity of trial or any other proceeding, find all allegations of the complaint, as amended, to be true and mak6 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. NOTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE - The undersigned parties to this Agreement will each notify the Regional Director in writing what steps the Charged Party has taken to comply herewith. Such notification shall be given within 5 days, and again after 60 days, from the date of the approval of this Agreement. In the event the Charging Party does not enter into this Agreement, initial notice shall be given within 5 days after notification from the Regional Director that no review has been requested or that the General Counsel has sustained the Regional Director. Contingent upon compliance with the terms and provisions hereof, no further action shall be taken in the above captioned case(s). Veolia Transportation Services Inc., (Phoenix Division) By: ame an itle
Date
Amalgamated Transit Union, Local 1433, AFL-CIO By Name and Title
Date
2A
c mmen d By: Dat App Y: Date J nGi 1::I opoulos, Attorney 3 1Regional Dir ector
[to be inserted on standard Board Notice Letterhead]
Cases: 28-CA-23249 28-CA-23358 28-CA-23401 28-CA-23497
FEDERAL LAW GIVES YOU THE RIGHT TO: Form, join or assist a union Choose representatives to bargain with us on your behalf Act together with other employees for your benefit and protection Choose 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, payroll employees, 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 by engaging in surface bargaining, with no intention of entering into any final or binding collective-bargaining agreement WE WILL NOT threaten you by telling you that we will stop collecting Union dues from your paychecks, or convey 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 and conditions of your employment by ceasing the collection of Union dues from your paychecks-, or (2) delay in 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 and deal directly with employees in the Unit. WE WILL NOT fail and refuse to provide relevant information requested by the Union for the purpose of carrying out its representational duties, or fail and refuse to arbitrate grievances after the expiration of our collective-bargaining agreement involving rights which accrued or vested during the term of the collectivebargaining agreement. WE WILL NOT in any like or related manner interfere with, restrain, or coerce you in the exercise of the rights 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 good faith with them for a successor agreement. WE HAVE restored the status quo terms and conditions of employment as they existed prior to our 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. WE WILL arbitrate the grievance related to Miguel Saavedra, involving rights which accrued or vested during 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 as a result of our unilateral changes, and provided the Union with the information that it requested from us that is necessary for, and relevant to, the Union's performance of its function as exclusive colleAve-bargaining representative of the Unit.
VEOLIA TRANS ORTATION SERICES, INC. ION) HOENIX DI
Dated:
By: (Re
D' tati I N)
rce the National Labor Relations Act. 35 to The National Labor Relations Board is an independent Federal agen y created 1 i repre ntation and we nt w, investigate nd remedy unfair We conduct secret-ballot elections to determine whether employees labor 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 information from the Board's website: www nlrb gov 2600 North Central Avenue - Suite 1800 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-3099 - Telephone: (602) 640-2160 Hours of Operation: Monday through Friday, 8-15 a.m. to 4:45 p m
Exhibit 11
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
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

Region 28 2600 North Central Avenue, Suite 1800 Phoenix, AZ 85004-3099 Telephone: (602) 640-2161 Facsimile: (602) 640-2178 Email: www.nlrb.gov
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 Employers 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 Employers 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 Regions Compliance Officer @ Miguel.Rodriguez@nlrb.gov 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 Regions Compliance Officer. If the Notice is distributed via e-mail, the Charged Party will forward a copy of the e-mail distributed to the Regions 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,
(Name) ( 4ame of Company)
4*
e*7 S
"(Job Title)
of
swear, under penalty of perjury, that Respondent has undertaken the following steps to comply with the 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 and bargain with them in good faith for a successor agreement. Respondent has restored the status quo terms and conditions of employment as they existed prior to our 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. Respondent has made Unit employees whole for any loss of earnings or other Backpay. benefits they may have suffered as a result of our unilateral changes. Information Reguest. Respondent has provided the Union with the information it requested of us that is necessary and relevant to the Union's performance of its function as the exclusive collective-bargaining representative of the Unit. Notice Postina. Respondent posted the Notice to Employees as required by the unilateral Settlement Agreement on the dates and at the locations indicated below. LOCATION 114 q/ 1 4 4c DATE POSTED
Ze-
C=-jK 4 /--h k
Signature:
Date:
Exhibit 13
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT

Region 28 2600 North Central Avenue, Suite 1800 Phoenix, AZ 85004-3099 Telephone: (602) 640-2161 Facsimile: (602) 640-2178 Email: NLRBRegion28@nlrb.gov January 31, 2012 Mr. James Foster, Jr. Attorney at Law McMahon-Berger 2730 N. Ballas Road, Suite 200 P.O. Box 31901 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039
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
VIA EMAIL: foster@mcmahonberger.com
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-CA023497. 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 clients 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 noncompliance 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
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and Cases 28-CA-068169 28-CA-071493
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 Boards Rules and Regulations, issues this Order Consolidating Cases, Consolidated Complaint and Notice of Hearing and alleges as follows:
1.
(a)
The charge in Case 28-CA-068169 was filed by the Union on
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,
with an office and place of business in Phoenix, Arizona, herein called the Respondents facility, has been engaged in the business of operating transportation services, including bus services. (b) During the 12-month period ending November 3, 2011, the
meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.
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 Sandi Claridge Edward Bednarczyk Tom Hock Jack Besch Jack Pisano (b) Vice President of Operations Director of Human Relations Director of Transportation Vice President, Labor Relations Finance Director General Manager
At all material times the Respondents counsel have served as
the Respondents negotiators and have been agents of the Respondent within the meaning of Section 2(13) of the Act. 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 operators employed by the Respondent at its Phoenix facility; excluding all other employees, office clerical employees, guards, and supervisors, as defined in the Act. (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, 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.
6.
(a)
On or about December 1, 2010, the Respondent implemented its
collective-bargaining proposal regarding Unit employee sick-leave accrual. (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
collective-bargaining proposal regarding a severance package for existing employees. (e) The subjects set forth above in paragraphs 6(a) through 6(d)
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. (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 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. (g) In or about October 2010, 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. (h) On or about March 15, 2011, the Respondent, by Barrick Neill,
at Respondents 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. (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) Respondent: (1) (2) engaged in regressive bargaining; reopened for negotiations various contract articles that During the period described above in paragraph 6(j), the
other terms and conditions of employment; (6) no changes to the proposals; and resubmitted proposals to the Union with insubstantial or
(7) (l)
bargained with no intent of reaching an agreement.
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.
(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) (3) refusing to bargain collectively with the Union; 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 Respondents unilateral changes and continue them in effect unless and until the Union states its desire not to bargain over a change, a collectivebargaining agreement is reached with the Union, or a lawful impasse is reached in bargaining.
(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 Respondents 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 Agreements 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) Respondent: (1) resubmitted proposals to the Union, including its Best During the period described above in paragraph 7(a), the
and Final Company Proposal on August 9, 2011, which proposals included no, or
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 (2) (c) bargaining: (1) (2) declared an impasse in negotiations; and declared its intent to implement its bargaining proposal, bargained with no intent of reaching an agreement.
On or about September 15, 2011, the Respondent, during
including a one-time severance package for existing employees, by on or about midOctober 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 Respondents 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.
(h)
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. 8. By the conduct described above in paragraph 7, the Respondent has
commerce within the meaning of Section 2(6) and (7) of the Act. WHEREFORE, as part of the remedy for the unfair labor practices alleged 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 Respondents 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.
10
ANSWER REQUIREMENT The Respondent is notified that, pursuant to Sections 102.20 and 102.21 of the Boards Rules and Regulations, it must file an answer to this complaint. The answer must 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. An answer may also be filed electronically through the Agencys 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 Agencys website informs users that the Agencys 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 Agencys website was off-line or unavailable for some other reason. The Boards 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.
11
Service of the answer on each of the other parties must still be accomplished by means allowed under the Boards 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. NOTICE OF HEARING PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on April 3, 2012, 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 2012.
Cornele A. Overstreet, Regional Director Attachments
12
Form NLRB-877
VEOLIA TRANSPORTATION SERVICES, INC. (PHOENIX DIVISION) and AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO
DATE OF MAILING:
Cases 28-CA-068169 28-CA-071493
January 31, 2012
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 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Tempe, AZ 85281-2802 7010 1060 0000 1441 4508 Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1433, AFL-CIO, CLC 11024 North 28th Drive, Suite 185 Phoenix, AZ 85029 James N. Foster Jr., Attorney at Law McMahon Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039
Michael J. Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward Keenan & Barrett PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012-1994

/s/ Iliana Ferrance DESIGNATED AGENT /s/ Kay Davis
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31st day of January 2012.
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 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 2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Tempe, AZ 85281-2802 Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1433, AFL-CIO, CLC 11024 North 28th Drive, Suite 185 Phoenix, AZ 85029
James N. Foster Jr., Attorney at Law McMahon Berger 2730 North Ballas Road, Suite 200 St. Louis, MO 63131-3039 Michael J. Keenan, Attorney at Law Ward Keenan & Barrett PC 3838 North Central Avenue, Suite 1720 Phoenix, AZ 85012-1994
Exhibit 15

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

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

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

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO

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

On November 28, 2011, Respondent

Find that Respondents First Answer, Second Answer and Third

FORM EXEMPT UNDER 44 U S C 3512 FORM NLRB-501

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

CHARGE AGAINST EMPLOYER

DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE Date Filed 11/8/10

e Employer Representative Greg Wagoner. 114RM

(signatureof representativeor person making charge)

RECEIVED PHX- AZ NLRB-REGION 28 2011 NOV -8 PM 1: 44

FORM EXEMPT UNDER 44 U S C 3512 FORM NLRB-501 (2-08)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE Case Date iled 2/4/11

CHARGE AGAINST EMPLOYER

h Number of workers employed

as 4 c above Address same

RECEIVED PHX. AZ NLRB-REGION 28 2017 FEB -4 PM 2: 48

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

IWERNET FORM NLR5-501

00 NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE Date Filed 03/14/2011

INSTRUCTIONS: PRO MAOrlplinal wlth NLR13 Reqionak a. Name of Employer

1. EMPLOYER AGAINST WHOM CHARGE IS BR-QUGHT

Veolia Transportation Services, Inc,, Phoenix, Division

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

2225 West Lower Buckeye Road Phoenix, Arizona 85009

4b. Tel. No. 602-495-9466 4c. Cell No. 602-563-3801

4d, Fox No. 602-495-1385 4e. e-Mail

I declare that I have read the

Fax No- 802-279-8908 e-Mall

Arizona 85012 3838 N. Central, Ste. 1720, Phoenix,

RECEIVED PHX, AZ NLRB-REGION 28 2011 MAR 14 PM 1: 45

During the 12-month period ending November 8, 2010, the

The following employees of the Respondent, herein called the

The information requested by the Union, as described above in

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

/s/ Cornele A. Overstreet Cornele A. Overstreet, Regional Director Attachments

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

January 31, 2011

COMPLAINT AND NOTICE OF HEARING with form NLRB-4668 attached

Reporters: Argie Reporting Service

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31st day of January 2011.

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

FORM NLRB-4338 (6-90) 95kdh

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

NOTICE Case: 28-CA-23249

AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION, LOCAL 1433, AFL-CIO

The charge in Case 28-CA-23249 was filed by the Union on

meaning of Section 2(5) of the Act.

At all material times the following individuals held the

At all material times the Respondents counsels have served as

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

Respondent engaged in the following conduct: (1) engaged in regressive bargaining;

reopened for negotiations various contract articles that

By its overall conduct, including the conduct described above in

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

/s/ Cornele A. Overstreet Cornele A. Overstreet, Regional Director Attachments

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

April 29, 2011

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE OF:

Reporters: Argie Reporting Service

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 29th day of April 2011.