NATIONAL LAB RELATIONS BOARD - National Labor Relations ...

VII. LITIGATION 107Only brief references need be made to certain other proceduralpoints passed upon during the year. It has been held that while theBoard may not issue its complaint until a charge has been filed withit by some third person," the charge may be in general language wherethe Board's complaint is sufficiently specific, 47 or where all pertinentfacts are brought out at the hearing without prejudicial surprise."It has likewise been held that unfair labor practices which developedsubsequent to those stated in the charge may be found by the Boardwhere related to those stated in the charge. 49 In each of the foregoingsituations, the principal position of the Board has been that a chargeis not in the nature of a pleading at all, since it is the Board's complaintwhich initiates the unfair labor practice proceeding and statesthe issues to be heard, and that actually the requirement that a chargebe filed was intended by Congress only to prevent the Board from initiatingunfair labor practice proceedings upon its own motion. In theBoard's view, therefore, after a charge is filed, it is free to allege in itscomplaint what appear from its investigation to be the unfair laborpractices committed, whether they are more or less than or differ from,the matters brought to its attention in the charge. This position is furthersupported by the obvious fact that many charges are filed by laymenor by organizations not having the benefit of expert legal advice,whom the Act does not contemplate shall make the intensive investigationwhich the agents of the Board must necessarily undertake. Inthe decisions referred to above the courts have found it unnecessaryto pass upon this broad view since the objections raised could bedecided favorably to the Board on narrower grounds; the Board hasno doubt, however, of the correctness of its broad view."With respect to complaints issued by the Board, the courts haveheld that the sole function of a complaint is to inform the employer ofthe unfair labor practices in issue and to give him a plain statementof the matters claimed to constitute them; accordingly, the complaintneed not be as particular as a common law pleading, and neither thedetailed facts of alleged violations nor the relief sought need be setforth in it. 51 Similarly, the courts will disregard minor variancesbetween the complaint and the findings, and amendments of the complaintto conform to the proof are proper.52With respect to hearings for the taking of evidence before trialexaminers, the decisions of the courts during the past year recognizethe right of trial examiners to engage in the examination of witnessesto bring out all relevant facts," to obtain instructions from the Boardon troublesome questions arising from the hearing 54 and to moderate'I N. L. R. B. V. Piqua Munising Wood Products Co., 109 F. (26) 552 (C. C. A. 6).4T Oatteumers Power Co. V. N. L. R. B., 113 F. (26) 38 (C. C. A. 61.43 F ort Wayne Corrugated Paper CO. V. N. L. R. B., 111 F. (26) 869 (C. C. A. 7).49 National Licorice ease, supra.0, Cf. Federal Trade Commission V. Meaner. 280 U. S. 19.en Consumers Power Co. V. N. L. R. B., 113F (26) 38 (C. C. A. 6) ; N. L. R. B. V. PiquaMunising Wood Products Co., 109 F. (26) 552 (C. C. A. 6) ; Republic Steel Corp. V.N. L. R. B., 107 F. (26) 472 (C. C. A. 3), certiorari denied, 309 II. S. 684, upon rehearing,Board order modified as to work relief provisions only, 311 U. S. 7.52 M. H. Ritzwoller Co. V. N. L. R. B., 114 F. (2d) 432 (C. C. A. 7).53 Guppies Co. Mfrs. V. N. L. R. B., 106 F. (26) 100 (C. C. A. 8) ; Arcadia Hosiery Co. V.N. L. R. B., 112 F. (26) 326 (C. C. A. 3), certiorari denied, 61 S. Ct. 38. Cf. Inland SteelCo. v. N. L. R. B., 109 F. (26) 9 (C. C. A. 7), in which the court predicated its conclusionthat the employer had not received a fair hearing in part upon its view that the trialexaminer had engaged in undue and disproportionate cross-examination.54 Consumers Power Co. V. N. L. R. B.. 113 F. (2d) 38 (C. C. A. 6).275987-41 8