NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

THIRD ANNUAL REPORT OF THE NATIONAL LABOR
RELATIONS BOARD
I. INTRODUCTION
A. WORK OF THE BOARD
In its Second Annual Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1937,
the National Labor Relations Board was compelled to report that at
the end of that period the Board was falling seriously behind in its
work. The Board is now in a position to report that as a result of
an increase in staff it was able to handle and close an increasing
percentage of its total cases as the year covered by this report progressed.
As of June 30, 1938, therefore, the Board was in a much
better position to dispose of its work expeditiously than it had been
the year before, although there was still much lost ground to recover.
The statistics of the Board's work during the year show that the
Board was able to dispose of most of the charges of unfair labor
practices which were filed without formal hearing, and that more
than half of the cases were closed by adjustments in substantial
compliance with the act and voluntarily accepted by all parties. A
large number of the representation cases filed were settled by means
of elections held by consent of all the parties, making hearings unnecessary
and resulting in collective bargaining between the employers
and the labor organizations winning the elections. The Board
is particularly gratified to report that although its agents conducted
scores of elections, participated in by tens of thousands of workers,
the secrecy of its ballots was never questioned and the high efficiency
of its election machinery won frequent and enthusiastic praise from
employers and unions alike.'
B. TENDENCY OF UNIONS TO RESORT TO THE ACT INSTEAD OF TO
ECONOMIC WEAPONS
Since the purpose of the National Labor Relations Act is to provide
a legal channel through which labor disputes centering around the
right to organize and bargain collectively can be adjusted without
resort to strikes or other forms of economic action, it is interesting
to compare strike data with that of the work of the National Labor
Relations Board. Prior to the validation of the act by the Supreme
Court, its full effectiveness in affording a peaceful outlet for employer-employee
differences could not of course be known.
Immediately following the decisions of the Supreme Court. there
occurred a most extraordinary increase in cases before the Board.
1 See chs. IV—VI, post, for statistical analyses of the work of the Board.
1