NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

224 THIRD ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
In National Labor Relations Board v. Millfay Manufacturing Company,
97 F. (2d) 1009, the Court granted the Board's request for
enforcement of its order directing the company to cease violating
section 8 (1), (2), and (5) of the act, and to reinstate its employees
who had gone on strike as a result of the company's unfair labor
practices.
FOURTH CIRCUIT
Jeffery-DeWitt Insulator Co. v. National Labor Relations Board,1'
91 F. (2d) 134, cert. denied ,.302 U. S. 731, involved the validity of an
order of the Board directing the company to reinstate strikers who
had gone on strike prior to the effective date of the act, and to bargain
collectively with the representatives of its employees. The Court
sustained the Board's finding that the company had, subsequent to
July 5, 1935, refused to bargain collectively with the union at a time
when the union was the representative of a majority of the company's
employees. Enforcement of the Board's order was granted.
In Appalachian Electric Power Co. v. National Labor Relations
Board, 93 F. (2d) 985, the Court set aside, for lack of evidence
'
an
order of the Board based upon a finding that the company had discriminated
in regard to the hire and tenure of employment of three
individuals, but sustained the Board's jurisdiction.
In Mooresville Cotton Mills v. National Labor Relations Board,
94 F. (2d) 61, the Court sustained the finding of the Board that the
company had violated section 8 (3) by refusing to reinstate eight of
its employees following a strike. The Court refused to enforce, however,
a provision in the Board's order directing reinstatement of four
of the eight employees, on the ground that such employees had obtained
regular and substantially equivalent employment elsewhere
and were, therefore, no longer employees of the company within the
meaning of section 2 (3) of the act. 12 Subsequently, the case was
remanded to the Board for further hearing on this question.
In National Labor Relations Board v. J. Freezer & Son, 95 F. (2d)
840, the Court sustained findings of the Board that the company had
discriminatorily discharged three employees and had dominated and
interfered with the formation and administration of a labor organization.
The Court granted the Board's request for enforcement of its
order requiring the company to reinstate with back pay the wrongfully
discharged employees and to disestablish the company-dominated
union.
National Labor Relations Board v. Wallace Manufacturing Co.,
Inc.
'
95 F. (2d) 818, involved the validity of findings of the Board
that the company had violated section 8 (1), (2), and (3) of the act.
The Board's findings were sustained, and enforcement of its order,
including reinstatement with back pay of a wrongfully discharged
employee and disestablishment of a company-dominated union, was
granted.
In Standard Lime & Stone Co. v. National Labor Relations Board,
97 F. (2d) 531, the Court sustained the Board's contention that employees
who were on strike on July 5, 1935, were employees of the
11 This case was discussed in the Second Annual Report, p. 34.
32 The Court held, however, that the Board could order the company to pay such workers
back pay for the period between the refusal to reinstate them and the date of their acquisition
of substantially equivalent employment.