NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD

84 THIRD ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
with the employer. The Board has sometimes found that the proximity
in occurrence revealed a causal connection between the employee's
union activity and his discharge. For example, in one case the Board
found :
* * * Although Miss Kule had not taken a noticeably active part in Union
affairs, the evidence incontrovertibly establishes that Mrs. Bauer had knowledge
of her Union affiliation at least after her argument with Miss Van Dyke,
in which she emphatically stated her preference for the Union. Her peremptory
discharge, coming during the working day, without giving her an
opportunity to finish the bundle she was inspecting, and immediately following
her vigorous expression of preference for the Union cannot be characterized as
nondiscriminatory. The unusual circumstances attendant upon the discharge
leave no doubt of the respondents' reason for their action."
In support of his defense that the dismissal had nothing whatsoever
to do with organization activity, the employer ordinarily produces
evidence for the purpose of establishing what reason did induce
him to act." The Board finds it difficult to believe that the asserted
reason is the real reason when it does not possess "either color or
substance," as in Matter of American Potash & Chemical Corporation,87
where the employer claimed he discharged the employee because
the employee requested "that the rumor which had caused his
demotion also be investigated." 88 Perhaps the most common explanations
offered by the employer in defense are that the employee
is inefficient, or that a drop in production required a reduction of
personnel which was accomplished pursuant to criteria not antiunion
in character. The Board considers all relevant facts tending to prove
or disprove that the employer's purported reason for the release is
his true reason; e. g. length of total employment, experience in the
particular position irom which the employee was discharged, efficiency
ratings and estimates by qualified persons, specific acts showing
degree of efficiency, skill, care, comparison with other employees.
If a drop in production is alleged, the Board also inquires into the
bona fides of this claim. Other common reasons offered by employers
, to explain a release and whose bona fides the Board examines, are
11 insubordination, infra ction of company rules, fighting, violence.
• Vhether the employee is in fact efficient, or whether he has seniority,
or whether production really did slump, are important only insofar
as they enable the Board to determine whether the employer sincerely
g, Matter of Arthur L. Colton, etc., and Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America. 6
N. L. R. B. 355; alsoPMatter of Montgomery Ward and Company, etc., and United Mail
Order and Retail Workers of America, 4 N. L. R. B. 1151; Matter of Consolidated Edison
Company of New York, Inc., etc., and United Electrical and Radio Workers of America,
etc., 4 N. L. R. B. 71, enforced in Consolidated Edison Company v. National Labor Relations
Board, 95 F. (2d) 390 (C. C. A. 2d, 1938), certiorari granted, 304 U. S. 555
(1938) ; Matter of Clover Fork Coal Company and District 19, United Mine Workers of
America, 4 N. L. R. B. 202, enforced in Clover Fork Coal Company v. National Labor
Relations Board, 97 F. (2d) 331 (1938) (C. C. A. 6th) ; Matter of Suburban Lumber
Company and International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Stablemen, and Helpers
of America, etc., 3 N. L. R. B. 194.
" Failure to explain a discharge at the hearing may indicate that the reason was anti:
union in character : Matter of Clover Fork Coal Company and District 19, United Mine
Workers of America, 4 N. L. R. B. 202, enforced in Clover Fork Coal Company v. National
Labor Relations Board, 97 F. (2d) 331 (C. C. A. 6th, 1938).
87 Matter of American Potash c6 Chemical Corporation and Borax and Potash Workers'
Union, etc., 3 N. L. R. B. 140, enforced in National Labor Relations Board v. American
Potash and Chemical Corporation, 98 F. (2d) 488 (C. C. A. 9th, 1938).
En Matter of The Federal Bearings Co., etc., and Local t97, International Union, United
Automobile Workers of America, 4 N. L. R. B. 467. (The respondent contended that an
employee was discharged for using improper language in the wash room. The Board
said it could not "take seriously the reasons" urged : "A factory wash room is not a
place where decorum in the use of language is commonly observed.")