NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

I. INTRODUCTION 3
1937, 34 percent; and March 1937, 26 percent. However, since April
1937 there has been a steady and mounting increase in the number of
workers involved in Board cases as against those involved in organization
strikes. The ratio of workers involved in Board cases as compared
with those involved in organization strikes during this period
ranges from 138 percent in April 1937 to 1,856 percent in February
1938.
This analysis is pertinent to any consideration of what the future
may bring. Though the period available for study is brief, the tendencies
are distinct and uninterrupted. Industrial unrest, particularly
where the right to organize is an important issue, finds two main
outlets—strikes and appeal to the Board. The former is drastically
affected by such cyclical fluctuations as business recession or progression;
the latter scarcely so. While the number of cases before the
Board has a seasonal pattern which is similar to that of strikes, it is,
nevertheless, steadier. As an established, legally sanctioned agency, it
provides an outlet for industrial protest which might otherwise result
in strikes; and a larger proportion of such protests are being taken to
the Board rather than expressed in the form of strikes.
C. STATE LABOR RELATIONS BOARDS
In its last report the Board stated that it looked with favor on the
adoption of State labor relations acts patterned after the National
Labor Relations Act. Consequently, the Board regrets that during
the fiscal year covered by this report no other States saw fit to follow
the example previously set by Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania,
Utah, and Wisconsin by passing labor relations acts. Labor
relations bills were, however, introduced in several legislatures.
Last year the Board also reported that it hoped to make cooperative
arrangements with the State boards to the end that administrative
friction and lack of uniformity in the application of principles
would not ensue. This hope has been completely fulfilled and the
Board or its agents has been able to achieve satisfactory working
arrangements with all of the State boards or their agents. As a
result, cases filed with this Board in which State boards had jurisdic-
- tion were immediately and informally transferred to the State boards,
or vice versa, with a minimum of misunderstanding and with no delay.
Since many cases which would have previously been filed with this
Board but over which this Board would nevertheless not have had
jurisdiction were filed with State boards after they were organized,
the unnecessary burden of investigation of such cases theretofore
carried by the Board was lifted.
Naturally, the Board hopes that when the State legislatures meet
again they will give serious consideration to the question of bringing
to workers engaged in intrastate business the benefits now enjoyed
by workers in interstate commerce. The Board has never been jealous
of its jurisdiction and is prepared to cooperate with any new State
boards to the same extent as it has with the boards already created.
D. COURT REVIEW OF THE BOARD'S ORDERS
No single event in the life of the Board during the past year can
be compared in significance to the great constitutional decisions which