TWENTY-SIXTH ANNUAL REPORT - National Labor Relations Board

Injunction Litigation 185
of subparagraph (B) by recognition or organization picketing within
12 months of the conduct of a valid election at the employer's establishment,
and 23 alleged violations of subparagraph (C) by recognition
or organization picketing for more than a reasonable period without
a petition for an election being filed'
A. Injunction Litigation Under Section 10(j)
As reported above, only one petition for injunctive 'chef under
the discretionary provisions of section 10(j) was filed in fiscal 1960 8
This involved a union's alleged iefusal to bargain wide' section
(b) (3) of the act m accot dance with the requirements of section 8(d)
of the act ° As found by the court, the union had a contract with
the employer fixing the terms and conditions of employment on a
city sewer construction job; the contract specified that it was to continue
in effect for the duration of the job After negotiations fot
certain changes in working conditions, which it asserted were to be
applicable to the city sewer job, the union struclethe sewet job "foi
lack of a contract" without prior notice to the Fedetal and State
mediation services The union contended that it struck to obtain
a contract foi future jobs, not the sewer job The corn t rejected this
contention and found that the stiike, being in support of a demand
for new conti act terms on the sewer job, violated section 8(b) (3) and
5 (d) in that it was called without the required 30-day notices to the
conciliation services and was for the put pose of terminating the existing
contract on the sew& job On appeal, the Second Cii cult affitmed
the district court's findings and injunction order "
B. Injunction Litigation Under Section 10(1)
In fiscal 1961, 83 petitions under section 10(1) went to final order,
the courts granting injunctions in 70 cases and denying injunctions in
13 cases" Injunctions were issued m 29 cases restricted to alleged
secondary action proscribed by section 8(b) (4) (B) Injunctions were
issued in four additional section 8 (b) (4) (B) cases which also enjoined
coercive conduct proscribed by section 8(b) (4) (A) to obtain "hot
cargo" agreements contrary to the provisions of section 8(e) Three
injunctions were issued enjoining the maintenance of "hot cargo"
'All of these cases and the actions theiein are reflected in table 18, ap pendix A
Shortly after the close of the fiscal year, tmo other sec 10(j) proceedings were instituted
each involving the alleged refusal of the charged employer to discharge its bargaining
obligation under sec 8(a) (5) of the act See Madden v Alberto Culver Co, No 61
C1754 (D C N 111 ) , Kennedy v Telecomputing Corp • 1341-61—Y (D C S Calif )
0 McLeod v Compressed Air, Foundation, Tunnel, eta, 'Workers (Catapano Grow), 194
Supp 479 (DC ENY )
10 See 202 F 2d 358 (CA 2)
1 See tables 18 and 20 in appendix A