TWENTY-SIXTH ANNUAL REPORT - National Labor Relations Board

92 Twenty-sixth Annual Report of the National Labor Relations Board
the group ol union members not known by the employer to be union
members, tends to discourage union membership and activities no less
than discrimination against known union members alone"
But, in Gibbs Corporation, 5 the Board found violations of section
8(a) (1) and (4), and not of 8(a) (3), wheie the employe' discharged
employees who formed a committee solely for the purpose of filing
unfair labor pi actice chat ges with the Board, since the discharges in
the paiticular case did not discourage membership in the incumbent
muon and the committee was not a labor mganization within the
meaning of the act °
b Discrimination for Protected Activities
Discummation against employees in their employment because of
activities piotected by section 7 of the act 7 is violative of section
8(a) (3), pi ovided, as noted above, it tends to encourage or discourage
membership in a labot oiganization 8 Accordingly, the question is
frequently pi esented whether the employees' activities involved come
within the statutory protection °
Dining the past yea' , the Boat d consideled the issue of protected
activities in a nun ibei of cases and found violations of section 8 (a) (3)
where employers discriminated against employees because of such
employee conduct as a strike in pi otest against the lawful discharge
of a fellow employee ," the circulation of a petition among employees
for a, special union meeting to learn the progiess of bargaining negotiations,
11 union solicitation of fellow employee during nonworking
time in violation of an invalid no-solicitation iule, 12 oi during working
• 131 NLRB No 118
In the case of one of these employees. the Board found a violation of sec 8(a) (1)
because the employer discharged him upon the mistaken belief that be had joined in filing
these unfair labor practice charges, although he had in fact not done so prior to his dischaige
See also Sherry Mfg Go, 128 NLRB 739, mhere in employee's discharge fox
esenbng a griei ance concerning a olicing conditions on behalf of herself and another
employee was found violative of sec 8(a) (1) only because the employee's conduct aim not
related to union activities
7 Sec 7 provides that "Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form
join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their
own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective
bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain
from any or all of such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by
an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment
Lb atithortred in Section S(a) (31
8 Discrimination In emplo yment for such activities which does not tend to encourage or
discourage union membership is nevertheless violative of the prohibition of sec 8(a) (1)
against employer interference with employees' sec 7 rights The remedy for both ti peg
of discrimination in employ ment is the same see, e g, Sherry Mfg Co, 128 NLRB 739
1,11obp Coin, 131 NLRB No 118 cf Kohl'', Go, 128 NLRB 1062 1093 footnote 51
See Twenty-fifth Anntril Report (1000), p 66
" T h e National Automatic Products Go, 128 NLRB 072, 078-680 See also Kohler Co
128 NLRB 1062, 1084, where the employer discharged 53 striking shell department em
ployees for the sole reason that they were on strike and Community Shops Inc 130 NLRB
1522
"Aurora City Lines, Inc , 130 NLRB 1137
18 Texas Aluminum Go, Imo, 131 NLRB No 69