NATIONAL LAB RELATIONS BOARD - National Labor Relations ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

VII. [LITIGATION 99Refusal to enter into written agreement covering matters agreedupon.—The duty to bargain collectively includes an obligation to attemptin good faith to reach a collective bargaining contract.33 Asthe Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has stated :It is obvious that the employer who enters into negotiations with a laborunion representing his employees, with his mind hermetically sealed againsteven the thought of entering into an agreement with the union, is guilty ofrefusing to bargain collectively with the representatives of his employees ingood faith, as required by the act, and is therefore guilty of an unfair laborpractice.Thus the requirements of section 8 (5) are not met merely by meetingwith representatives of the majority union,1 nor by the adjustment ofgrievances through the Union.2It has likewise been held by the Circuit Courts of Appeals for theSecond, Fourth, Sixth and Tenth Circuits that a refusal on the partof an employer to enter into a signed contract with the representativeof its employees, embodying any terms which may be agreed upon,constitutes a refusal to bargain within the meaning of Section 8 (5).3In addition, the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit hasheld that where there is a refusal to bargain upon other grounds, theBoard may, in the exercise of its power to order appropriate affirmativeaction direct the employer to embody in a written contract anyterms which may be agreed upon in the bargaining which he is orderedto perform.' The Circuit Court of Appeals for the SeventhCircuit has alone taken the opposite view, 5 although it has held that theemployer's refusal to sign a written contract may be considered asindicating a refusal to bargain in good faith.°Majority status of union at time of refusal to bargain is determinative.—Indetermining whether or not an employer has refused tobargain within the meaning of Section 8 (5), the issue of the Union'smajority status must be determined as of the date of the allegedrefusal to bargain. Hence the fact that thereafter the Union mayhave lost its majority cannot "relieve [the employer] from the consequencesof its refusal to bargain, which was an unfair labor prac-" N. L. R. B. v. Somerset Shoe Co., 111 F. (26) 681 (C. C. A. 1) ; N. L. R. B. v. ExpressPublishing Co., 111F. (2d) 588 (C. C. A. 5), certiorari granted, 61 S. Ct. 134.22 N. L. R. B. v. Griswold Mfg. Co., 106 F. (2d) 713, 723 (C. C. A. 3).I N. L. R. B. v. Griswold Mfg. Co., 106 F. (2d) 713 (C. C. A. 3) ; A'. L. R. B. v. ExpressPublishing Co., 111 F. (2d) 588 (C. C. A. 5), certiorari granted, 61 S. Ct. 134.2 N. L. It. B. v. Highland Park Mfg. Co., 110 F. (2d) 632 (C. C. A. 4).a Art Metal Construction Co. v. N. L. R. B., 110 F. (26) 148 (C. C. A. 2) ; N. L. R. B.V. Highland Park Mfg. Co., 110 F. (26) 632 (C. C. A. 4) ; Hartsell Mills Co. v. N. L. R. B.,111 F. (2d) 291 (C. C. A. 4) ; Continental Oil Co. v. N. L. R. B., 113 F. (2d) 473 (C. C. A. 10),certiorari granted as to another issue, 61 S. Ct. 72. This position has since beenaffirmedby the decisive ruling of the Supreme Court in H. J. Heinz v. N. L. R. B.,61 S. Ct. 320,affirming 110 F. (2d) 843 (C. C. A. 6) ; see also Bethlehem Shipbuilding Corp. V. N. L. R. B.,114 F. (26) 930 (C. C. A. 1), certiorari dismissed January 13, 1941; Wilson cE Co. Inc. V.N. L. R. B., 114 F. (26) 759 (C. C. A. 8), all decided after the close of the fiscal year.4 N. L. R. B. v. Sunshine Mining Co., 110 F. (26) 780 (C. C. A. 9), certiorari deniedJanuary 13, 1941. Although one of the judges who participated in this determinationwas of the opinion that the refusal to sign a contract was of itself a violation ofsection 8 (5), the other two judges thought the point not directly raised in the case,and rested their decision to enforce the Board's order on the theory described in thetext. This view was likewise expressed by the fourth, sixth, and tenth circuits as anindependent ground for enforcing the orders of the Board reviewed by them in the casescited in the preceding footnote. In each of these cases, there was proof of a refusal tobargain, independent of the refusal to sign a written contract.s Inland Steel Co. v. N. L. R. B., 109 F. (2d) 9 (C. C. A. 7) ; M. H. Ritzwoller Co. v.N. L. R. B., 114 F. (2d) 432 (C. C. A. 7).• Fort Wayne Corrugated Paper Co. v. N. L. R. B., 111 F. (26) 869 (C. C. A. 7).
100 FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDtice." 7 It has likewise been established that an employer may notrefuse to bargain with a union on the ground that it has lost itsmajority status, where the defections from the union were caused bythe employer's unfair labor practices; 8 and loss of majority, if shown,will be presumed to have resulted from the occurrence of unfair laborpractices.°Where majority status i9 not questioned at time of refusal to bargain,union need not prove majority to employer.—An employer who refusesto bargain regardless of whether the union represents a majority maynot later defend that refusal upon the ground that the union did notprove its majority prior to the refusal. In such a case the employertakes the risk of what the facts may show as to the Union's majoritystatus.1°Obligation to bargain continues daring strike or shut-down.—Theobligation to bargain collectively is not terminated by the commencementof a strike, 11 nor by a temporary shut-down of the employer'splant.12Requirement that employer bargain in good faith.—It has beenuniversally recognized that the requirements of section 8 (5) demandmore than lip service, and that hence the employers' conduct mustevidence an effort in good faith to arrive at understandings withthe representatives of its employees. la Lack of good faith is indicatedwhere the employer engages in unfair labor practices whilebargaining with the union; 14 where it engages in dilatory tacticsduring negotiations;" or where it ignores requests for conferences;18 or where it institutes a wage cut by unilateral action andwithout consulting the majority representative;" or where he goesover the heads of the union representatives and attempts to bargainindividually with the employees or to induce them to abandon the'National Licorice Co. V. N. L. R. B., 309 U. S. 350, 357. Accord : N. L. R. B. V. ThighlandPark Mfg. Co., 110 F. (2d) 632 (C. C. A. 4) ; Dartsell Mills Co. V. N. L. R. B.,111 F. (2d) 291 (C. C. A. 4) ; Bussmann Mfg. Co. v. N. L. R. B., 111 F. (2d) 783 (C. C. A.8) ; Continental Oil Co. v. N. L. R. B., 113 F. (2d) 473 (C. C. A. 10), certiorari grantedas to other issues, 61 S. Ct. 72; International Ass'n of Machinists v. N. L. R. B., 110 F. (2d)29 (App. D. C.) affirmed 311 U. S. 72. It has also been held that the majority status of aunion, once shown, will be presumed to have continued, if the contrary is not shown,.N. L. R. B. v. Highland Park Mfg. Co., supra; N. L. R. B. V. Whittier Mills Co., Ill F. (2d)474 (C. C. A. 5) ; N. L. R. B. V. Piqua Munising Wood Products Co, 109 F. (3d) 5452(C. C. A. 8); Al. H. Ritzwoller Co. V. N. L. It. B. 114 F. (3d) 432 (C. C. A. 7).9 N. L. R. B. v. Bradford Dyeing Asen, 310 U. S. 318: American Mfg. Co. v. N. L. R. B.106 F. (2d) 61 (C. C. A. 2), affirmed as modified, 308 U. S. 629; N. L. R. B. v. SomersetShoe Co., 111 F. (2d) 681 (C. C. A. 1) ; Continental Oil Co. V. N. L. R. B., 113 F. (26) 473(C. C. A. 10), certiorari granted, 61 S. Ct. 72.°N. L. R. 11. v. Highland Park Mfg. Go., 110 F. (2d) 632 (C. C. A. 4) ; Al. H. RitztoollerCo. V. N. L. R. B. 114 F. (26) 432 (C. C. A. 7) ; Bussmann Mfg. Co. V. N. L. R. B., 111F. (2d) 783 (C. C. A. 8). The question of the effect upon the Board's remedial order ofalleged defections from the Union is treated below at p. 105.1° N. L. R. B. v. Somerset Shoe Co., 111 F. (2d) 681 (C. C. A. 1) ; American Mfg. Co.v. N. L. R. B., 106 F. (2d) 61 (C. C. A. 2), affirmed as modified, 309 U. S. 629; HartsellMills Co. v. N. L. R. B., 111 F. (26) 291 (C. C. A. 4) ; N. L. R. B. V. Piqua Munising WoodProducts Co., 109 F. (2d) 552 (C. C. A. 6) ; Al. H. Ritzwoller Co. v. N. L. R. B., 114 F. (21)432 (C. C. A. 7) ; Continental Oil Co. v. N. L. R. B., 113 F. (2d) 473 (C. C. A. 10), certiorarigranted as to other issues, 61 S. Ct. 72. Where the employer does demand proof ofmajority, he must accept a reasonable offer of such proof as in the normal caRe, signedmembership cards. N. L. R. B. v. Dahlstrom Metallic Door Co., 112 F. (2d) 756 (C. C. A. 2).N. L. I?. B. v. Piqua Munising Wood Products Co., 109 F. (2d) 552 (C. C. A. 6) ;Al. H. Ritzwoller Co. v. N. L. R. B., 114 F. (2d) 432 (C. C. A. 7).i2 N. L. I?. B. V. Somerset Shoe Co., 111 F. (2d) 681 (C. C. A. 1).12 See, for example, National Licorice Co. v. N. L. R. B., 309 U. S. 350."American Mfg. Co. V. N. L. R. B.. 106 F. (2d) 61 (C. C. A. 2), affirmed as modified, 309U. S. 629.15 H. J. Heinz Co. v. N. L. R. B., 61 S. Ct. 320; Al. H. Ritzwoller Co. V. N. L. R. B.,114 F'. (2d) 432 (C. C. A. 7).16 N. L. R. B. V. Somerset Shoe Co., 111 F. (2d) 681 (C. C. A. 1) ; N. L. R. B. v. GoodCoal CO., 110 F. (2d) 501 (C. C. A. 8), certiorari denied, 310 II. S. 630; Al. H. RitzwollerCo. v. N. L. R. B., 114 F. (26) 432 (C. C. A. 7).' N. L. R. B. v. Whittier Mills Co., 111 F. (2d) 474 (C. C. A. 5).
Page 3 and 4:
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDWILLI
Page 6 and 7:
CONTENTSPageI. Introduction 1A. Wor
Page 8 and 9:
FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE NATIONAL
Page 10 and 11:
I. INTRODUCTIONThe number of worker
Page 12 and 13:
I. INTRODUCTION 5finding powers. In
Page 14 and 15:
I. INTRODUCTION 7percent. There was
Page 16 and 17:
II. THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BO
Page 18 and 19:
III. PROCEDURE OF THE BOARDPrevious
Page 20 and 21:
IV. STATISTICAL RECORD OF BOARD ACT
Page 22 and 23:
IV. STATISTICAL RECORD OF BOA:RD AL
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26:
IV. STATISTICAL RECORD OF BOARD Ac,
Page 30 and 31:
TABLE I V.-Disposition of unfair la
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Region.TABLE VIII.—Disposition of
Page 36 and 37:
TABLE X.-Character and results of r
Page 38 and 39:
V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHEDIn previou
Page 40:
V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLIS.LLED 33coupl
Page 44 and 45:
V. PRINCiPLES ESTABLISHED 37tion. T
Page 46 and 47:
V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 39in the
Page 48 and 49:
V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 41conditi
Page 50 and 51:
V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 43majorit
Page 52 and 53:
V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 45"highly
Page 54 and 55:
V. PRIN ICAPLES ESTABLISHED 47As we
Page 56 and 57: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 49resenta
Page 58 and 59: V. PRINCIPT.RS ESTABLISHED 51organi
Page 60 and 61: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 53the Tri
Page 62 and 63: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 55Baking
Page 64 and 65: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 57seek to
Page 66 and 67: V. PRINCLL'LES ESTABLISITED 59ineli
Page 68 and 69: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 61regardi
Page 70 and 71: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 63bargain
Page 72 and 73: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 65As note
Page 74 and 75: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 67ent rep
Page 76 and 77: V. PRINUPLES ESTABLISHED 69appropri
Page 78 and 79: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 71also be
Page 80 and 81: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 739. Prec
Page 82: V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 75work, s
Page 85 and 86: 78 FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL
Page 89 and 90: VI. JURISDICTIONThe decisions of th
Page 105: 98 FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL
Page 109 and 110: 102 FIFTFI ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONA
Page 131 and 132: IX. DIVISION OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1
Page 151 and 152: 144 FIFTFI ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONA
Page 157 and 158:
150 FIFTH ANNUAL REPORT OF NATIONAL
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Page 163 and 164:
Page 165 and 166:
XII. FISCAL STATEMENTThe expenditur
Page 167 and 168:
Page 169:
show all

NATIONAL LAB RELATIONS BOARD - National Labor Relations ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?