J. - National Labor Relations Board

138 FOURTH ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDN.L.R.B. v. Sands Mfg. Co., 306 U. S. 332, 342, clearly indicates thatan employer's obligations under the Act are not satisfied if he declinesto reduce points agreed upon as a consequence of collective bargainingto a contract between the parties. Such is the express holding of theFifth Circuit in Globe Cotton Mills v. N. L. R. B., 103 F. (2d) 91,,94• 93 Correspondingly, an employer violates his bargaining obligationif he insists upon embodying the fruit of the negotiations in individualcontracts with employees rather than in a collective agreement withthe representative of the employees.'The subject matter regarding which, an employer is obligated tobargain collectively includes the .interpretation or modification of anexisting contract.—In N.L.R.B. v. Sands Mfg. Co., 306 U. S. 332, 342,,the Supreme Court indicated that the existence of a collective contractfor a definite term between an employer and a union does not freethe employer from a duty to negotiate with the union regardingdifferences of opinion as to its interpretation or regarding the union ssuggestions for its modification.Necessity for a definite request for collective bargaining.—In N. L..R. B. v. Columbian Enameling and Stamping Co. 306 U. S. 292,,297, the Supreme Court held that section 8 (5) of the Act is not violatedunless the employees' representative makes a definite request for negotiations.In that case the Court held that overtures made to anemployer by Federal conciliators at the union's request did not constitutea sufficient request, inasmuch as it did not expressly appearwhether the conciliators, in their several hours' conversation with theemployer, actually informed him that they were seeking to open negotiationsat the request of the union involved.2Determination of majority representatives.—Loss of employee.status; as defined in section 2 (3) of the Act (see p. 125 if, supra), disentitlesa worker to be counted in computing his union's majority..Fansteel Metallurgical Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 306 U. S. 240, 261-2 ;•N.L.R.B. v. Sands Mfg. Co., 306 U. S. 332, 334•3Membership records kept by the union, consisting of applicationcards signed by employees, are adequate proof of the union's ma-.jority. Fansteel Metallurgical Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 306 U. S. 240.4When employees who have previously designated a union as their bar-.gaining agent are induced by their employer to express themselves as9,, In this case the Court held that the employer was obligated to make a binding contractwith the union embodying at least the employer's present policy regarding wages,hours, and working conditions, if the union desired it, even though some of those policies:were well established and noncontroversial.1 N. L. R. B. V. Hopwood Retinning Co. 98 F. (2d) 97, 100 (C. C. A. 2) ; Globe Cotton,Mills v. N. L. R. B. 103' F. (2d) 91, 94 (C. , C. A. 5) ; N. L. I?. B. v. Louisville Refining Co.,.102 F. (2d) 678, 680 (C. C. A. 6), certiorari denied October 9, 1939, affirming and enforcingMatter of Louisville Relining Co. and Int. Ass'n, of Oil Field, Gas Well and Refinery'Workers of America, 4 N. L. R. B. 844, 860.2 Justices Black and Reed dissented, pointing out that, under the circumstances, theemployer could scarcely have been unaware that the union desired to negotiate, and noting*that the Court below had upheld the Board's finding to that effect. 306 U. S., at 303-4.8 So also, during the previous fiscal year, Standard Lime (6 Stone Co. V. N. L. R. B.,97 F. (2d) 531, 535.(C. C. A. 4).*Sustaining the Board's findings to that effect in Matter of Fansteel Metallurgical Corp.and Amal. Ass'n of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers of N. Amer., No. 66, 5 N. L. R. B.930, 940-1. So also, N. L. R. B. v. Louisville Refining Co., 102 F. (2d) 678, 680(C. C. A. 61, certiorari. denied October 9, 1939 : N. L. R. B. V. O. A. Lund. 103 F.818(2d) 815,(C. C. A. 8), enforcing Matter of C. A. Lund, etc., and Woodenware Workers Union, Local:No. 20CAL etc., 6 N. L. R. B. 423, 435 N. L. R. B. V. National Motor Bearing Co., 105 F..(2d) 652, 660 (C. C. A. 9).