01/22/2025: NLRB Jurisdiction Over Contractors to Common Carriers
The Railway Labor Act's jurisdiction was significant curtailed in Swissport Decision.
PrimeFlight Aviation Services, Inc., 12-RC-357112 (Regional Election Decision)
The case involves a petition filed by the Transport Workers Union of America, AFL-CIO, seeking to represent a unit of aircraft fuelers and lead aircraft fuelers employed by PrimeFlight Aviation Services, Inc., at Orlando International Airport. The primary issue was whether the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) or the National Mediation Board (NMB) had jurisdiction over the Employer’s operations. The Employer argued that its operations were subject to the Railway Labor Act (RLA), which would place jurisdiction with the NMB, while the Petitioner contended that the NLRB had jurisdiction under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
The NMB previously used a two-part test to determine RLA jurisdiction: (1) whether the work performed by the employer was traditionally performed by carrier employees and (2) whether the employer was controlled by a carrier. However, the NMB recently abandoned this test for contractors providing services to air carriers, holding that the RLA only applies to common carriers by air. This shift was evident in the NMB’s decision regarding Swissport Cargo Services, where it concluded that Swissport, a contractor for United Airlines, was not a common carrier and thus not subject to the RLA. The NLRB deferred to this decision, finding that Swissport was subject to the NLRA.
In an advisory opinion specific to this case, the NMB determined that PrimeFlight’s operations at Orlando International Airport were not subject to the RLA because PrimeFlight is not a common carrier by air. The NMB emphasized that PrimeFlight’s connection to air transportation was solely through service contracts with airlines, which did not establish RLA jurisdiction. The NLRB has historically deferred to the NMB’s jurisdictional determinations, as seen in the DHL Worldwide Express case, where the Board gave substantial deference to the NMB’s opinion on RLA jurisdiction.
The Employer sought to introduce testimony and evidence to show that its operations were traditionally performed by airline employees and that it was controlled by air carriers. However, the Hearing Officer rejected this offer of proof, citing the NMB’s abandonment of the two-part test in the Swissport decision. The Regional Director affirmed this decision, noting that the NMB’s recent rulings made the Employer’s evidence irrelevant to the jurisdictional determination.
The Regional Director concluded that PrimeFlight is an employer engaged in commerce under the NLRA, and its employees are covered by the Act.
Significant Cases Cited
Swissport Cargo Services, LP, 52 NMB 25 (2024): The NMB abandoned the two-part test for determining RLA jurisdiction over contractors, holding that only common carriers by air are subject to the RLA.
Swissport Cargo Services, LP, 373 NLRB No. 144 (2024): The NLRB deferred to the NMB’s decision in Swissport, finding that Swissport was not subject to the RLA and that the NLRB had jurisdiction under the NLRA.
PrimeFlight Aviation Services, Inc., NMB Case No. R-7647, 52 NMB No. 15 (December 11, 2024): The NMB found that PrimeFlight’s operations at Orlando International Airport were not subject to the RLA because PrimeFlight is not a common carrier by air.
DHL Worldwide Express, 340 NLRB 1034 (2003): The NLRB deferred to the NMB’s advisory opinion on RLA jurisdiction, establishing a precedent for substantial deference to the NMB’s determinations.