07.02.2015 Views

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

64 THIRD ANNUAL REPORT OF <strong>NATIONAL</strong> <strong>LABOR</strong> <strong>RELATIONS</strong> <strong>BOARD</strong><br />

v,../ 8. FAVORITISM BETWEEN RIVAL UNIONS AS A VIOLATION O' SECTION 8 (1)<br />

One particular situation presented by some of the cases warrants<br />

separate consideration—i. e., the instance of the employer infringing<br />

the Act by campaigning for, or otherwise lending assistance to, one<br />

union against a rival organization, neither of which, however, is •<br />

company-dominated. In Matter of National Electric Products Corporation,59<br />

the United Electrical and Radio Workers of America,<br />

affiliated with the Committee for Industrial Organization, commenced<br />

organizational activities among the employees in March 1936,<br />

and was immediately confronted by company hostility. Some time<br />

in May 1937 the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,<br />

affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, initiated a rival<br />

organizing movement at the plant. From the outset, company officials,<br />

foremen, and the plant superintendent actively assisted the<br />

Brotherhood in securing members. Solicitation for that organization<br />

was permitted throughout the plant during working hours. On May<br />

22, 1937, the company agreed in writing to recognize the Brotherhood<br />

as the exclusive bargaining representative of the employees. A<br />

local of the brotherhood, however, was first established at the plant<br />

the following day, when its initial meeting was held. A closed-shop<br />

contract between the company and the favored union was consummated<br />

on May 27. 60 All during this period, the United claimed a<br />

majority and attempted in vain to obtain a conference with the company<br />

for collective bargaining purposes. The Brotherhood's claim<br />

of majority representation was accepted by the company without<br />

question. After the agreement was signed, a company official told a<br />

group of employees that "if the A. F. of L. Union is good enough<br />

for the company, it is good enough for * * * you fellows."<br />

Thereafter employees were informed by the company that if they<br />

failed to join the Brotherhood, the equivalent of membership dues<br />

in that union would be deducted from their wages. The Board found<br />

the above course of conduct by the employer to constitute interference,<br />

restraint, and coercion of the employees in the exercise of their<br />

right to self-organization, as guaranteed in section 7, and hence a<br />

violation of section 8 (1).61<br />

In Matter of The Grace Company," the United Garment Workers<br />

of America, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, secured<br />

a substantial membership among the employees. The company<br />

favored a rival union, the international Ladies' Garment Work-<br />

• 69 Matter or National Electric Products Corporation and United Electrical and Radio<br />

Workers of America, 3 N. L. R. B. 475.<br />

"Prior to the hearing before the Board, the United States District Court for the Western<br />

District of Pennsylvania entered a decree in favor of the Brotherhood, as plaintiff, against<br />

the company, as defendant, specifically enforcing the closed shop contract. However, no<br />

qubstion of unfair practice under the Act was before that court. The Board pointed<br />

out in its decision that section 10 (a) of the Act expressly vests in the Board exclusive<br />

power to prevent unfair labor practices, and exclusive jurisdiction to review and enforce<br />

the Board's orders, in the Circuit Court of Appeals. The Board stated : "This Act embodies<br />

a public policy of national concern and is the supreme law of the land on the subject matter<br />

covered by it. • * a We hold that the decree in question cannot foreclose the Board's<br />

consideration of the validity of the May 27 contract under the Act. • • *"<br />

el For similar cases, see Matter of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., and<br />

United Electrical and Radio -Workers of America, 4 N. L. R. B. 71, order enforced in<br />

Consolidated Edison Co. V. National Labor Relations Board, 96 (2d) 390 (C. C. A. 2d,<br />

1938) certiorari granted, 304 U. S. 555; Matter of Lenox Shoe Company, Inc. e and United<br />

Shoe Workers of America, 4 N. L. R. B. 372; Matter of National Motor Bearing Company<br />

and International Union United Automobile Workers of America, 5 N. L. R. B. 409; Matter<br />

of Zenite Metal Corporation and United Automobile Workers of America, 5 N. L. R. B.<br />

509; Matter of Missourt-Arkansas Coach Lines, Inc., and The Brotherhood of Railroad<br />

Trainmen, 7 N. L. R. B. 186.<br />

"Matter of The Grace Company and United Garment Workers of America, 7 N. L. R. B.<br />

766.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!