NATIONAL LAB RELATIONS BOARD - National Labor Relations ...

V. PRINCIPLES ESTABLISHED 43majority representative. The Board has treated this problem andthese possibilities in a number of cases cited in the margin. 84C. COLLECTIVE BARGAININGSection 8 (5) makes it an unfair labor practice for an employer—to refuse to bargain collectively with the representatives of his employees,subject to the provisions of section 9 (a).By section 9 (a) the representative designated by the majority ofthe employees in an appropriate collective bargaining unit is theexclusive representative of all the employees in such unit "for thepurposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay, wages,hours of employment, or other conditions of employment.' Accordingly,the Board has held it to be an unfair labor practice withinsection 8 (5) for an employer to refuse to negotiate with the statutoryrepresentative concerning conditions of employment. Thus inMatter of Singer Manufacturing Co. and Electrical, Radio & MachineWorkers of America, etc., 86 the Board held that the employer's refusalto negotiate concerning paid holidays, vacations and bonuses, constitutedan infraction of section 8 (5). And in Matter of Wash,ougalWoolen Mills and Local 137, etc.,66 the Board held that the employerwas obligated to negotiate with the statutory representative concerningthe reinstatement and demands of certain strikers :The respondent took the position * * * that it was not obligated tobargain with respect to the employees who had walked out since they were nolonger in its employment * * * These employees * * were engagedIn a current labor dispute and were, accordingly, employees within section 2(3) of the act. The respondent was, therefore, obligated to bargain withrespect to them upon request of the union. Moreover, without regard to thestatus of these persons within section 2 (3) of the act the union demands ofNovember 18 and December 12 that the respondent reinstate the employeeswho had left work and submit the matter in dispute to arbitration were legitimatesubjects of bargaining within section 9 (a) of the act, and therefore therespondent was obligated to negotiate with the union with respect to thosedemands.In Matter of Aladdin Industries, Inc., and United Automobile Workersof America, etc.," the Board held that a union demand upon anemployer to discharge a supervisor was a demand with respect toconditions of employment and stated :The type of supervisor under whom an employee works is of direct concernto the employee and may be of vital importance to him. The conduct of asupervisor may affect an employee's well-being as much as low pay, long hours,or other unsatisfactory conditions of work. A dispute involving the dischargeor demotion of a supervisor objectionable to the employees is, we think, adispute concerning a condition of employment * * *Various forms through which the employer's unlawful refusal to"Matter of Ansley Radio Corporation and Local LUZ etc., 18 N. L. R. B., No. 108;Matter of J. E. Pearce Contracting and Stevedoring Co., Inc. and International Longahoremen'sand Warehousemen's Union, etc., 20 N. L. R. B., No. 102; Matter of Pacific GreyhoundLinea and Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, 22 N. L. R. B., No. 12, reopenedJuly 27, 1940. Cf. Matter of M and M Woodworking Co. and Plywood it Veneer Workers'Union, etc., 6 N. L. R. B. 372, set aside in M and M Woodworking Company v. N. L. R. B..101 F. (2d) 938 (C. C. A. 9) ; Matter of Smith Wood Products, Inc. and Plywood andVeneer Workers' Union, etc., 7 N. L. R. B. 950.as 24 N. L. R. B., No. 41.6.3 23 N. L. R. B., No. 1.6T 22 N. L. R. B., No. 101.275987-41-4