TWENTY-SIXTH ANNUAL REPORT - National Labor Relations Board

Injunction Litigation 201
sentation question by the holding of a Board-conducted election A
ploy's°, however, exempts h.= the proscuption of this subpalagiaph
picketing "for the purpose of truthfully advising the public" that the
employer does not employ members of or have a contract with the
union, unless an effect of such picketing is to cause employees of other
employe' s to ietuse to make pickups ot deli mies or perfoim °the"
sel vices Also, a ploy's° to section 10(1) prohibits the Board horn
seeking injunctive relief In a section 8(b) (7) case if a meritolious
charge has been filed alleging that the employer has dominated m.
interfered IN ith a litho" olganization in violation of section 8(a) (2)
of the act
a Constitutionality of the Section
In the Irving case,75 the union attacked the restrictions set forth in
the section as an unconstitutional infiingement of the light of free
speech gualanteed In the first amendment The corn t, i elying
Supreme Court decisions upholding the constitutional authmity of
Congress to regulate picketing which is for the purpose of defeating
a "valid public policy," rejected the union's contention, stating that
"Congress can constitutionally enjoin peaceful picketing aimed
at preventing effectuation of that policy" The decision was affirmed
on appeal to the Fourth Cncuit 76 Likewise, the court in the Islander
case 77 held that it "cannot be questioned that the Congress could cm.-
tail lawfully certain types, oi all picketing under ceitain circumstances,"
citing Supreme Coui t decisions
b An Object of Recognition or Organization
Section 8(b) (7) restricts picketing which has "an object of leccimtion
or organization" In a number of cases the unions have contended
that their picketing is for some purpose other than organization
or recognition In those cases where the court found, however, that
"an" object of the picketing also nos recognition or organization, it
enjoined the picketing In Baronet 78 the First Circuit sustained the
injunction of the district court finding that "an object" of the picketing
was lecognition, even though another object was to piotest certain
layoffs As the Fn si, en cult stated, "The statute does not eqini e that
the sole object" be iecognition ca. organization 78
7- Potato Retail Stole Employees Local Union No 692 (livin g, Inc ), 188 F SuPP
192 (DC Md )
'287F 2d509 (CA 4)
77 .1renttedy v Los Angeles Joint Ezecutsve Board of Hotel tE Restaurant Employees
(The Islander), 192 F Supp 339 (DC S Calif )
" Local 846 Intel national Leathc, Goods Union v Compton (Baronet of Pum to Rico),
202F 2d ..113 (CA 1)
" Subsequent to the close of the fiscal ye tr the Board issued its decision finding tint
an object was recognition Bat onet of Puet to Rico, Inc , 133 NLRB No 160