Gas & By-Product Coke Workers Local Union No. 12018 v. Wis. Emp't Relations Bd.

• Decision Date: 07 December 1943
• Citation: 244 Wis. 258,12 N.W.2d 36
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
• Parties: GAS & BY-PRODUCT COKE WORKERS LOCAL UNION NO. 12018 v. WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD et al.

244 Wis. 258

12 N.W.2d 36

GAS & BY-PRODUCT COKE WORKERS LOCAL UNION NO. 12018

v.WISCONSIN EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS BOARD et al.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Dec. 7, 1943.

Appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court for Milwaukee County; Gustave G. Gehrz, Circuit Judge.

Reversed and remanded.

This is an action commenced October 10, 1942 by Gas & By-Product Coke Workers Local Union No. 12018 affiliated with District 50, United Mine Workers of America, a labor organization, to review an order of the Wisconsin Employment Relations Board. In this action the Board filed a cross-petition for enforcement of the order. Proceedings before the Board were initiated by one Frank A. Butcher charging the Milwaukee Gas Light Company with unfair labor practices. The Gas & By-Product Coke Workers Local Union No. 12018 intervened, since the principal issue was the validity of an employment agreement between the employer and the union. The Board found the employer guilty of an unfair labor practice in encouraging membership in the union by discrimination in respect of hiring and tenure of employment. The employer was ordered to desist, to post notices that it would do so, to offer reinstatement to complainant, and to notify the board of its compliance. The employer notified Butcher of his reinstatement and posted the notices, but the union petitioned the circuit court for review, and the employer rescinded these steps pending proceedings in circuit court. Upon its own motion the trial court remanded the record to the Board to take certain evidence which it considered to affect the equities of the situation as between complainant and the union, and also to have a bearing upon the question whether the agreement between the union and the employer constituted an all-union contract. Upon remand the Board scheduled a further hearing at which complainant moved to dismiss the proceedings. The employer and the union acquiesced in this motion. The Board denied the motion and offered to hear any further evidence that the parties desired to offer. No further testimony was offered.

The Board amended its findings and order so as to delete those portions relating to the discharge of complainant. It found, however, that the employer's observance of the contract with the union was an unfair labor practice. The order was correspondingly modified to require only that the employer desist from encouraging membership in the union by discrimination and hire and tenure of...