NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

116 THIRD ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
its officials, to have described their powers and duties, ordered them
to present demands and dismissed their meetings.
In some cases, the advent of a union with outside affiliations has
spurred employers to bargain collectively with employee organizations
and to make concessions theretofore denied for fhe purposes of
continuing control of such organizations. In Matter of American
Potash & Chemical Corporation, 62 the association had attempted
since September 1934 to secure the cooperation of the respondent in
obtaining adequate housing facilities and to secure a general increase
in wages. However, it was only in March and April of 1936, shortly
after a union affiliated with the American Federation of Labor had
become active, that the respondent appropriated funds to relieve the
housing shortage, granted a general wage increase, and arranged for
regular meetings with the association."
' In determining whether an employer's activities have resulted or
were intended to result in his domination of and interference with
a labor organization within the meaning of section 8 (2), the Board
t/has also considered, among other factors the contrast m the treatment
accorded by the employer to rival organizations. Under certain
circumstances, the Board has found significant the employer's
willingness to negotiate and come to an agreement with one organization
coupled with a reluctance or refusal to deal with representatives
of the rival organization. In Matter of Taylor Trunk Company,"
the president of the respondent promised members of the
shop union a contract even before the shop union was fully organized
and told the employees that it would not sign any contract with
the rival union. In Matter of Metropolitan Engineering Company,"
the respondent granted to the association concessions similar to those
which it had denied to the representatives of the genuine labor organization.
Again, in Matter of Burnside Steel Foundry Company,"
although the respondent refused to recognize the genuine
union unless it was certified by the Board, it granted recognition to
the "Foundry Workers" without insisting upon such procedure.
A significant contrast between the favoritism displayed by an employer
toward one union and hostility directed against a rival union
appears in Matter of Fansteel Metallurgical Corporation:" In summation,
the Board stated:
Matter of American Potash & Chemical Corporation and Borax and Potash Workers'
Union No. 20181, 3 N. L. R. B. 140.
• In Matter of Idaho-Maryland Mines Corporation and International Union of Mine,
Mill and Smelter Workers of America, Local 2,83, 4 N. L. R. B. 784, upon the appearance
of the union, the respondent approached the League and effected a written agreement
recognizing it for its members. See also Matter of G. Sommers d Co. and Warehouse
Employees Union No. 20297, of St. Paul, 5 N. L. R. B. 992.
Matter of Taylor Trunk Company and Luggage Workers Union, Local No. 50 of the
International Ladies' Hand Bag, Pocketbook and Novelty Workers Union, 6 N. L. R. B. 32.
See also Matter of Highway Trailer Company and United Automobile Workers of America,
Local No. 185 and Local No. 186, 3 N. L. R. B. 591.
,5 Matter of Metropolitan Engineering Company and Metropolitan Device Corporation and
United Electrical and Radio Workers of America, Local No. 1208, 4 N. L. R. B. 542.
ee Matter of Burnside Steel Foundry Company and Amalgamated Association of Iron,
Steel and Tin Workers of North America, Lodge No. 1719, 7 N. L. R. B. 714. See also
Matter of C. A. Lund Company and Novelty Workers Union, Local 1866 (A. F. of L.
successor; Christian A. Lund et ca., and Woodenware Workers Union, Local 20481, 6
N. L. R. B. 423, where the Board concluded that the respondent hastened to recognize
the Independent Order to discourage and defeat the formation of a genuine union.
e, Matter of Fansteel Metallurgical Corporation and Amalgamated Association of Iron,
Steel, and Tin Workers of North America, Local 66, 5 N. L. R. B. 930, enforcement denied
sub nom Fan. feel Metallurgical Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, 98 F.
(2d) 375 (C. C. A. 7, 1938). On November 21, 1938, the United States Supreme Court
granted certiorari. See also Matter of The Federal Bearings Co., Inc., and its affiliate or
subsidiary, Schatz Manufacturing Company, and Local 297, International Union, United
Automobile Workers of America, 4 N. L. R. B. 467; Matter of Titan Metal Manufacturing
Company and Federal Labor Union No. 19981, 5 N. L. R. B. 577.