1943 - National Labor Relations Board

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Studies of the Results of Board Activities 71the employer make necessary continued action by the Board untilemployees become free to exercise their rights under the Act.After the elimination of company domination of labor organizations,in the great majority, of instances employees form or join a union andenter into collective-bargaining relationships with their employers.By late spring of 1943 contracts had been signed or negotiations wereunder way with about two-thirds of the employers included in thisstudy. Eliminating the instances in which cases were still pendingfor compliance with orders of the Board or the courts, we find thatcollective bargaining had been established in 70 percent of the casesadjusted before formal action, nearly 77 percent of those closed oncompliance with the Board order, and 65 percent of those closed oncompliance after court action.In about 45 percent of these situations the disestablishment ofa company union was followed by an election to choose a representativefor the purpose of collective bargaining In 81 percent of thosewhere elections were held, collective bargaining resulted. On theother hand, in only 52 percent of the cases with no election had collectivebargaining begun at last report. The elections which followeddisestablishments were won by the union which had filed the originalcharge in 61 percent of the elections. Some other union won in 31percent of the elections. No union won in 8 percent. In all of thecases on which information was available, the union which filed theoriginal charge was engaged in collective bargaining in 53 percent ofthe cases, and some other union in 13 percent. No collective bargainingwas reported in the spring of 1943 in only about one-third ofthese companies or plants where a company-dominated union hadbeen disestablished.STUDIES OF ELECTION RESULTSA number of studies have been made of elections conducted bythe Board for the choice of bargaining representatives, in connectionwith consideration of special problems. For example, study of theresults of run-off elections preceded the Board's recent change ofpolicy as to inconclusive elections.' Several other studies of electionsshow that in the majority of cases a representation question settledby an election remains settled, as indicated by the absence of laterpetitions to the Board. In only a very small minority of cases arethere numerous successive elections for choice of bargaining representatives.In 1 study of 85 elections held although some union alreadyhad a closed-shop contract, and 100 elections where a union had anon-closed-shop contract, in only 3 of the former, and 4 of thelatter had there been more than 2 elections throughout the Board'shistory. In the study of the results of disestablishment of companydominatedunions, summarized above, 128 were followed by 1election for the choice of bargaining representatives, 22 by 2 elections,'See Oh. V, p. 51.
72 Eighth Annual Report of the National Labor Relations Boardand only 3 by 3 later elections. The bargaining agent was changedafter the original election in only 8 cases of the 153 here included,to June 30, 1943, after the disestablishment of company-dominatedunions from July 1, 1940, to June 30, 1942.While the Board in general finds that valid contracts of reasonableduration are a bar to a new determination of bargaining representativesduring their term, under certain circumstances it orders electionsdespite the presence of contracts. 2 In those carefully defined situationsin which the Board finds it proper under the Act to proceed toelections for the choice of representatives in spite of an existing contract,the Board is performing an important function. It providesan orderly method whereby at appropriate times employees_ mayregister their choice of bargaining agent, even when they have beencovered by an existing contract. In the relatively few cases wherethe Board orders elections under these circumstances, the rival unionswin many of the elections. The policy of the Act, to protect therights of employees to bargain collectively through representativesof their own choosing, is thus effectuated through the work of the Boardin conducting these elections to settle disputes over _representation.The results of such elections, in cases where there were closed-shopand non-closed-shop contracts, have been studied for the period fromJuly 1, 1940, through November 1942. The study was limited toelections ordered by the Board, a total of 95 closed-shop and 140non-closed-shop contract cases during this period. "Closed shop"was defined broadly here, to include preferential or union-shop contracts,where it appeared from the record that in practice union membershipwas required of all employees, or that, essentially, a closedshopsituation was present.In general the contracting unions maintained their position somewhatbetter in the closed-shop situations than in the others. In the95 closed-shop cases the petitioner, the rival union, won in 46 percentof the elections. In the 140 non-closed-shop cases the petitioningunion won in 72 percent. of the elections. The greater success of theincumbent unions where they had a closed shop appeared to be due toa number of factors. The closed-shop contract itself indicated thestrength and stability of the union in some cases. In others the closedshop and the possibility of reprisals against employees who advocatedanother union made it more difficult for a rival union to secure supporteven in the presence of employee dissatisfaction with the incumbentorganization.The results of these elections are shown below according to thetime or circumstances under which the rival union filed its petition.Where the local union with the contract had changed its affiliationduring the contract and the Board ordered an election, the contestwas Won by the newly affiliated union in all but one of both the closedshopand non-closed-shop cases. In other instances where the Boardordered an election during a contract, either the contract was about to3 Ibid, pp. 45-49.
Page 1 and 2:
EIGHTH ANNUAL REPORTOF THENATIONAL
Page 3 and 4:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDH. A.
Page 5 and 6:
4•
Page 8 and 9:
THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Page 10 and 11:
The N. L. R. B. in the War 3The War
Page 12 and 13:
The N. L. R. B. in the War 5closed.
Page 14 and 15:
The N. L. R. B. in the War 7current
Page 16 and 17:
The N. L. R. B. in the War 9involvi
Page 18 and 19:
The N. L. R. B. in the War 11secret
Page 20 and 21:
Organizational and Administrative D
Page 22 and 23:
Organizational and Administrative D
Page 24 and 25:
IIIA STATISTICAL ANALYSIS OF CASES.
Page 26 and 27:
Statistical Analysis of Cases Filed
Page 28 and 29: Statistical Analysis of Cases Filed
Page 34 and 35: IN/THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT
Page 36 and 37: The N. L. R. A. in Practice: Unfair
Page 38 and 39: • LIBRARY• -.AL tABOR, A.T1Into
Page 50 and 51: THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT IN
Page 52 and 53: The N. L. R. A. in Practice: Repres
Page 66 and 67: The N. L. R. A. in Practice: Jurisd
Page 68 and 69: Enforcement Litigation 61all interm
Page 70 and 71: Enforcement Litigation 63of the Boa
Page 72 and 73: Enforcement Litigation 65than to st
Page 74 and 75: Enforcement Litigation 67tively. Th
Page 76 and 77: Studies of the Results of Board Act
Page 80 and 81: Studies af the Results of Board Act
Page 82 and 83: New Statutory Functions Vested in t
Page 84 and 85: New Statutory Fund ions Vested in t
Page 90 and 91: APPENDIX ASTATISTICAL TABLESThe fol
Page 92 and 93: Appendix A. Statistical Tables 85Ta
Page 98 and 99: Table 8.-Disposition of unfair labo
Page 100 and 101: ,Dismissed, totalBefore hearingBy B
Page 102 and 103: Table 11.—Number of elections and
Page 104 and 105: Table 13.-Number of elections and p
Page 106 and 107: APPENDIX BLIST OF CASES HEARD DURIN
Page 108 and 109: Appendix B. List of Cases Heard Dur
Page 110 and 111: Onan, D. W., & Sons.O'Neil, J. E.,
Page 128 and 129:
APPENDIX CLIST OF CASES IN WHICH TH
Page 130 and 131:
Appendix C. Decisions Rendered Duri
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Appendix. C. Decisions Rendered Dur
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Borg-Warner CorpBrennan, P., CoBurn
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
APPENDIX DSUMMARY OF LITIGATION FOR
Page 172 and 173:
Appendix D. Summary of Litigation 1
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Appendix D. Summary of Litigation.
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Appendix D. Summary-of Litigation 1
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186:
Page 189 and 190:
APPENDIX ENATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS
Page 191 and 192:
184 Eighth Annual Report of the Nat
Page 193 and 194:
1 86 Eighth:A nnual Report of the N
Page 195 and 196:
Page 197 and 198:
Page 199 and 200:
Page 201 and 202:
WAR LABOR DISPUTES ACT 1AN ACTRelat
Page 203 and 204:
Page 205 and 206:
Page 207 and 208:
Page 209 and 210:
Page 211 and 212:
Page 213 and 214:
APPENDIX FThese Rules and Regulatio
Page 215 and 216:
Page 217 and 218:
Page 219 and 220:
Page 221 and 222:
Page 223 and 224:
21 8 Eighth Annual Report of the Na
Page 225 and 226:
220 Eighth Annual Report of-the Nat
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241:
APPENDIX GREGIONAL OFFICESFirst Reg
Page 244 and 245:
Appendix G. Regional Offices 239emu
Page 246 and 247:
Appendix G. Regional Offices 241DIM
Page 248:
Appendix G. Regional Offices 243
Page 252 and 253:
Appendix G. Regional Offices 247
Page 254 and 255:
LIST OF TABLESTables Appearing in T
show all

1943 - National Labor Relations Board

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

Delete template?

Save as template?