National Labor Rel. Bd. v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 10889.
| Decision Date | 05 December 1949 |
| Docket Number | No. 10889.,10889. |
| Citation | 179 F.2d 507 |
| Parties | NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION, ANSONIA PLANT. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit |
Mozart G. Ratner, Washington, D. C., Robert N. Denham, Washington, D. C., for petitioner.
John J. Adams, Cleveland, Ohio, Robert D. Blasier, Job Taylor II, Pittsburgh, Pa., James C. Davis, John J. Adams, Squire, Sanders & Dempsey, Cleveland, Ohio, for respondent.
Before SIMONS, MARTIN and McALLISTER, Circuit Judges.
In a petition to enforce an order of the National Labor Relations Board it appears that the only issue involved is whether the Board's finding that the discharge of Doyt Fouty by the foreman of the respondent's Ansonis plant was for union activities is supported by substantial evidence.
The record shows that for producing war material the respondent had established a subsidiary plant for the purpose of availing itself of an available labor force in Ansonia, Ohio, some distance from its Lima, Ohio, plant. This labor was predominantly female and was unorganized. Fouty, upon the assumption that the basic pay rate and bonus at Ansonia were lower than the rates paid by respondent at its Lima plant, began agitating the matter among the employees at Ansonia and some steps were taken looking toward organization. Fouty was discharged by one of two foremen at Ansonia for agitation at the plant which disturbed the workers during employment and destroyed the morale of the working force. While there is some evidence of organizational activity at Ansonia there is no evidence that the foreman knew of Fouty's part in it, and the trial examiner so found. He recommended the dismissal of the complaint, also on the ground of Fouty's inability to describe with any degree of accuracy his own activity.
The Board found that the foreman "either knew or ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Meijer, Inc. v. N.L.R.B.
...Div. of Jim Causley, Inc. v. NLRB, 620 F.2d 122, 125 (6th Cir.1980) (relying on Air Surrey, supra). In NLRB v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 179 F.2d 507 (6th Cir.1949) (per curiam), we considered another case of concerted activity. There, one Fouty, an employee engaged in war production, be......
-
Illinois Ruan Transport Corporation v. NLRB
...protest over wages (in the absence of a collective-bargaining agreement) protected as a "concerted activity," NLRB v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp., 179 F.2d 507 (6 Cir. 1949);4 nor a personal grievance over a change of a foreman, American Art Clay Co. v. NLRB, 328 F.2d 88 (7 Cir. 1964); nor "gr......
-
Southern Oxygen Co. v. National Labor Relations Bd., 6763.
...774; Carter Carburetor Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, 8 Cir., 140 F.2d 714. In National Labor Relations Board v. Westinghouse Electric Corporation, 6 Cir., 179 F.2d 507, 509, (upon which Petitioner relies), the Court was careful to state: "There was no concerted action in th......
-
National Labor Relations Bd. v. National Paper Co.
...v. Whitin Machine Works, 1 Cir., 204 F.2d 883, 884; Tampa Times Co. v. N. L. R. B., 5 Cir., 193 F.2d 582, 583; N. L. R. B. v. Westinghouse Electric Corp., 6 Cir., 179 F.2d 507. The evidence fails to show that Cole's union affiliation was brought to respondent's attention during her short te......