TWENTY-SIXTH ANNUAL REPORT - National Labor Relations Board

Enforcement Litigation 171
employer, in years past, in maintaining a program of "noncontributory"
group insurance for the benefit of the employees in the bargaining
unit The parties' contracts had customarily specified the dollar
amounts of benefits payable to employees or their beneficiaries under
this program, which embraced life, disability, and hospital-surgicalmedical
insurance. And the company conceded that the cost of carrymg
such insurance was a factor it took into account in foimulating
its bargaining position with respect to the level of benefits it was
willing to guarantee It refused, however, to divulge the amount of
the premiums it had been paying, on the ground that the union was
not "legally entitled" to such information The Board held that this
position was violative of section 8(a) (5), reasoning that insurance
benefits of the type involved here were an inseparable aspect of
"wages," and that the premium costs incurred by the employer must
therefore be available to both parties for the purposes of collective
bargaining
The First Circuit disagreed with this decision can the court's view,
the benefits payable to employees under a group insurance plan are
bargamable matters since they come within the category of "wages"
Hence, as to such benefits, the employer has a duty to "make available
to the employees' representative whatever facts and data may be relevant
and necessary to informed and realistic bargaining " However,
the court held, where the insurance plan is noncontributory, the
employer is not under a duty to disclose its costs "While no doubt
employer costs affect wages," the court stated, "a direct relationship
between them is at the best speculative, and not in accord with current
business economy or business thinking" At the same time, the court
indicated that the employer would have been required to divulge the
requested cost information if the insurance plan had been contributory,
with a share of the premiums coming out of the employees' wages as
a direct deduction, or if the union here had demanded increased or
broader insurance coverage for the employees and the company had
rejected the demand "on the ground of cost " 35
(2) Seniority List of Employees
In another case involving an employer's duty to supply information,"
the Fifth Circuit required the employer to furnish a seniority
list of employees in order to enable the union to enforce and administer
the current bargaining agreement adequately, even though the
union, during the preagreement bargaining negotiations, had allegedly
es Believing that this decision is erroneous in principle, and in conflict with at least one
other circuit court decision, NLRB v John S Swift Co, 277 F 2d 641 (C A 7, 1960),
the Board filed a petition for Supreme Court review However, certiorar i was denied on
Dec 4, 1961
U l LRB v Gulf Atlantic Warehouse Oo , 291 F 2d 475