TWENTY-SIXTH ANNUAL REPORT - National Labor Relations Board

94 Twenty-sixth Annual Report of the National Labor Relations Board
in Stewart Hog Ring Co, Inc ,22 the Board held that strikers who
engaged in shouldei -to-shoulder mass picketing for only 30 to 40
minutes when the picket line was first being organized were entitled
to reinstatement, where the strikers dispersed when ordered to do so
by a deputy sheriff, thereafter picketed in an orderly manner, and
the picketing never pievented plant ingress or egress In this case,
the Board also held that while the cutting of a fence was misconduct
of sufficient seriousness to warrant a refusal to reinstate those responsible
for it, it was not a sufficient basis for the refusal to reinstate
three stiikers absent "identification of the culprits " 28
However, in the Kohler case," a unanimous Board agieed that the
employer lawfully discharged the members of the union's strike committee
who du e,cted and controlled the strike during a period of mass
picketing which included incidents of blocking, shoving, and barring
nonstrikers and others from plant ingress and egress, and the
enforcement of the union's "pass" system conditioning entrance
to the employe'. 's premises upon procurement of a union pass A
Board majority also held that the employer did not violate section
8(a) (3) by discharging a selected number of strikers who participated
in the aforesaid mass picketing merely by being present on the
picket line, although there was no evidence that they had engaged in
any of the oveit acts of misconduct described above 25 In the majority's
view, the record clearly showed that a purpose for the picketing
dining this period was the barring of all ingress to and egiess from
the plant, and that all those participating in this picketing "must
have been aware of this object of the picketing, and did, by then
participation, in whatever capacity, actually deny admittance to nonstrikers
and otheap every bit as much as those pickets who were shown
to have actually physically engaged m the blocking of those persons
attempting to enter the plant " 25 It found further that "by the very
nature of their picketing, it is also plain that each of the pickets,
wherever located, was actually enforcing the union pass system "2
Similarly, the majority held that Kohler had lawfully discharged
strikers who assembled in groups along the sidewalk in front
of the company's employment office and on occasion, when job appli-
22 131 NLRB No 49
=In this case, the Board also held that while strikers' remarks to nonstrikers "Don't
you go in there or I will get you" and "I would like to take you back behind the building,"
were improper and not to be condoned, these remarks, when viewed in the context in which
they lk ere uttered, were not so flagi ant as to justify removal of these strikers from the
act's protection
24 IC ohlor Co, 128 NLRB 1062, 1102-1108, 1105, remanded in part by the Court of
Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Jan 26, 1962 (49 LRRM 2485)
14, at pp 1102-1105, 1108 Members Bean and Panning, agreeing with the trial
examiner, dissented on the ground that the employer "did condone and waive as a ground
for discharge mere participation in the mans picketing" Id, at p 1104
10 Id , at pp 1104-1103
lbid