79 F.Supp. 563 (S.D.N.Y. 1948), Wholesale and Warehouse Workers Union, Local 65, v. Douds

Citation:79 F.Supp. 563
Party Name:WHOLESALE AND WAREHOUSE WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 65, et al. v. DOUDS. AMERICAN COMMUNICATIONS ASS'N, C.I.O. et al. v. DOUDS.
Case Date:June 29, 1948
Court:United States District Courts, 2nd Circuit, Southern District of New York
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 563

79 F.Supp. 563 (S.D.N.Y. 1948)

WHOLESALE AND WAREHOUSE WORKERS UNION, LOCAL 65, et al.

v.

DOUDS.

AMERICAN COMMUNICATIONS ASS'N, C.I.O. et al.

v.

DOUDS.

United States District Court, S.D. New York

June 29, 1948

Neuburger, Shapiro, Rabinowitz & Boudin, of New York City (Victor Rabinowitz, Leonard B. Boudin and Belle Seligman, all of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiffs.

Robert N. Denham, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Mozart G. Ratner and Norton J. Come, Attorneys of the National Labor Relations Board, all of Washington, D.C., for defendant.

Before SWAN, Circuit Judge, and COXE and RIFKIND, District Judges.

Page 564

SWAN, Circuit Judge.

In case No. 1 the facts disclosed by the amended complaint and the supporting affidavits are as follows:

Local 65 is a local union affiliated with the United Retail Wholesale and Department Stores Employees of America, CIO. It has over 13,000 members in and about the City of New York, consisting of workers employed in warehouses, wholesales, processing, and distributing establishments. It has approximately 1,000 collective contracts with various employers throughout the city.

On or about July 8, 1947, Local 65 entered into an agreement with F. W. Woolworth Company, concerning employment conditions for the company's warehouse employees. That agreement expires on July 8, 1948. On May 20, Chauffeurs, A.F. of L. filed with the National Labor Relations Board, a petition to be certified as the representative of the employees of Woolworth. Local 804 and Woolworth, with the approval of the defendant, thereupon entered into an agreement for the holding of a consent election.

Local 65 has complied with Secs. 9(f) and (g) of the Taft-Hartley Act, but has not complied with Sec. 9(h); nor can it comply because one of its officers is a member of the Communist Party. The defendant has refused plaintiff's demand for a hearing and has refused to allow plaintiff a place upon the ballot for the election to be held, solely on the ground that plaintiff has failed to file the affidavits required by Sec. 9(h) of the Act. The election is to take place on June 30, 1948.

Local 65, its president, Arthur Osman, its vice-president, David Livingston, its secretary-treasurer, Jack Paley and Theodore Markowski, a member in good standing of Local 65, have...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP