12.07.2015 Views

J. - National Labor Relations Board

J. - National Labor Relations Board

J. - National Labor Relations Board

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

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

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

.5 8 FOURTH ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDIn Matter of R'epublic Steel Corporation and Steel Workers OrganizingCommittee, 12 the <strong>Board</strong> found in use a host of devices, oldand new, through which the employer sought to thwart self-organizationand collective bargaining. The <strong>Board</strong>, in summary, foundthat the respondent had engaged in violations of section 8 (1) :* * * By its espionage, shadowing, and beatings of organizers and activemembers of the Union ; its announcements, before and after the presentationby the Union of its proposed agreement, that it would not sign any contractwith the Union ; its statements to its employees attempting to vilify and discreditthe Union ; its threats to discharge union members and to close its plantsbefore recognizing the Union, and its other threats and warnings to employeesregarding the Union ; its attempts to turn civil authorities, business, andother interests against the Union in order to further its own anti-Union activities ;• its incitement of violence and hysteria, in order to terrorize union adherents ;its donation of tear and vomiting gas to the City of Massilon ; its support tothe Law and Order League of Massilon and the Back-to-Work Committees inMassilon, Canton, and Youngstown ; its activities in connection with the •incident at C. I. 0. headquarters at Massilon ;" its lay-offs, discharges, andlock-out * * *During the past year, several interesting cases have been decidedwhich illustrate other types of employer activity which the <strong>Board</strong>has prohibited as an infringement upon the rights guaranteed insection 7. In Matter of Harlan Fuel Company and United MineWorkers of America, District 19, 14 the employer excluded unionorganizers from a town completely, owned by it and in which allits employees resided. The employer attempted to justify this antiuniondevice on the ground that it had the right to exclude people.from its own property. The <strong>Board</strong> held that this could not be done,since the employees, as tenants of the respondent, had a right underordinary property law to receive visitors, and under the act toconsult with union organizers. The <strong>Board</strong> stated :In entering and passing through Yancey on their visits to the employees thereresiding, the union organizers were engaged in a transaction of mutual interest,the exercise by the employees of their right under the act to form and join alabor organization for the purpose of collective bargaining and other mutualaid and protection. The use made by the organizers of the customary passways,roads, and streets to reach the employees was accorded by law and could notbe defeated through the simple assertion by the respondent of a landlord'sinterest. By forcibly preventing the organizers from coming to or remainingin Yancey, the respondent not only violated this right but engaged in an unfairlabor practice * * * The rights guaranteed to employees by the act includefull freedom to receive aid, advice, and information from others, concerningthose rights and their enjoyment.15Employers are also prohibited from interfering with employees intheir selection of representatives of their own choosing. Accordingly,the <strong>Board</strong> has held it to be an unfair labor practice within section8 (1) for an employer to interfere with an election which the <strong>Board</strong>is conducting as part of its investigation to determine a question concerningrepresentation. 16 In Matter of Yale & Towne ManufacturingCompany and United Electrical and Radio Workers of America, Local12 9 N. L. R. B. 219, enforced as modified, November 8, 1939 (C. C.. A. 3).1.3 The <strong>Board</strong> found that deputies of the town, led by agents of the respondent, hadwithout provocation opened fire upon union headquarters.148 N. L. R. B. 25.15 The same principle was applied in Matter of West Kentucky Coal Company and UnitedMine Workers of America, District 23, 10 N. L. R. B. 88, petition for enforcement filedJune 21, 1939 (C. C. A. 6). Cf. Matter of Commonwealth Telephone Company and TheodoreR. &pion, et al., 13 N. L. R. B.. No. 39.18 Matter of Pacific Gas and Electric Company and United. Electrical and Radio Workersof America, 13 N. L. R. B., No. 32.

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!