NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

250 THIRD ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
labor policy, as well as the identification of exhibits on interstate
commerce and labor relations prepared by the Division and introduced
into the record. In two cases, other staff members testified.
(4) In the appellate stage of Board proceedings, the Division
assisted in the preparation of economic material for the briefs submitted
to the Circuit Courts of Appeal and the Supreme Court. Here
again factual data from authoritative sources, of a type now wellsettled
to be within the scope of judicial notice, was required in the
discussion of problems of jurisdiction and interpretation. In the
Pennsylvania Greyhound ease,3 the Division provided material on the
significance of union recognition in the practice of collective bargaining.
The references to authoritative writings on labor relations, supplied
in this connection, were expressly cited in the Supreme Court's
decision.
Economic material supplied for inclusion in the brief or as the
basis of argument in the brief was of two types : (a) Excerpts from
authoritative literature of which judicial notice could be taken, on
general economic questions; (b) Excerpts from official and standard
reference sources of which judicial notice could be taken, on particular
economic facts about the respondent. Both types appeared in
the Santa Cruz Fruit Packing case. 4 Material was supplied bearing
upon the importance of packing and canning of fruit in the national
economy, the dependence of the entire country upon the State of
California for that product, the dependence of California upon the
entire world as a market for its dried and canned fruit, the subsidiary
relationship of the respondent to Stokely Brothers, one of the
largest distributors of food products, and the position of the respondent
in the industry as well as the importance of its product in the
total flow of goods out of California.
In another case, the question before the court was whether or not
workers ceased to be "employees" within the meaning of the Act, upon
notice of discharge during the course of a strike. The Division
examined the works of authorities in industrial relations and found
them to be in support of the arguments of the litigation section. It
supplied the latter with excerpts from the authorities indicating that
dismissal during a strike was a common method of breaking strikes,
and that its object and effect was merely to transfor a strike into a
lockout.
Much of the material described above in the discussion of the scope
of the Division's work was either prepared for appellate briefs or
was recast for them, having been introduced into the hearing. Occasionally,
it was requested by litigation attorneys for background or
for inclusion in oral argument before the courts of review. In some
cases litigation attorneys conferred with staff members of the Division
of Economic Research on the economic aspects of issues bearing on
labor relations or interstate commerce.
WORK NOT IN CONNECTION WITH PARTICULAR CASES
The above discussion relates to the work of the Division on current
cases. In addition to such work, the Division was engaged in more
general studies on problems of labor relations for future use in case-
N. L. R. B. v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, 303 U. S. 261 (198).
'N. Ii. R. B. T. Santa Cruz Fruit Packing Co., 303 U. S. 453 (1938).