National Labor Rel. Board v. Johnson Steel & Wire Co.

• Decision Date: 01 April 1943
• Docket Number: No. 3835.,3835.
• Citation: 134 F.2d 785
• Parties: NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. JOHNSON STEEL & WIRE CO.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit

134 F.2d 785 (1943)

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. JOHNSON STEEL & WIRE CO.

No. 3835.

Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

April 1, 1943.

Louis Newman, Robert B. Watts, Gen. Counsel, Ernest A. Gross, Associate Gen. Counsel, Howard Lichtenstein, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Ruth Weyand, and Ramey Donovan, Attys., all of Washington, D. C., for National Labor Relations Board.

Ernest L. Anderson, of Worcester, Mass., for respondent on review.

Before MAHONEY and WOODBURY, Circuit Judges, and PETERS, District Judge.

MAHONEY, Circuit Judge.

This is a petition for the enforcement of an order issued by the National Labor Relations Board against respondent pursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, 29 U.S. C.A. § 151 et seq., ordering respondent in the usual manner to cease and desist from discouraging membership in Steel Workers Organizing Committee (C.I.O.) or in any other labor organization of its employees; to offer three of its employees immediate and full reinstatement to their former or substantially equivalent positions without prejudice to their seniority or other rights and privileges; to make whole these employees for any loss of pay they may have suffered by reason of respondent's discrimination against them, and to post notices.

This case turns on the alleged unfair labor practices of respondent in relation to these employees. The Board charges that respondent laid them off because of their union activities and thus committed violations of Section 8(1) and (3) of the Act.

The employees named in the Board's order are Philip Ferland, Thomas Dyson, Sr., and John Cox. We shall consider the evidence concerning them in that order.

(1) Philip Ferland was employed by respondent on August 12, 1940, and worked exclusively on frame 47 until it was temporarily shut down on January 25, 1941. During February and the greater part of March he worked regularly as an operator and helper on other frames and during the first three weeks of March he worked regularly on frame 48. According to the employment schedule posted on respondent's bulletin board, Ferland was scheduled to work on frame 48 as a helper on March 23, 24 and 25. The Board found that Ferland was transferred from frame 48 to unskilled work on March 24th and the reason for this transfer was the union activities engaged in by Ferland. He was replaced by another employee with less experience. The incident which occasioned the transfer was the distribution to a fellow employee of a copy of a labor newspaper called "Steel Labor News". The Board found that while Ferland was discussing with his fellow employee an article contained in the issue referred to, Wahlstrom, a foreman in respondent's employ, came upon them and became involved in a heated discussion with Ferland in which he called Ferland an insulting name. Ferland continued in unskilled work after his transfer until March 27, 1941, at which time the Board found that he was discharged by respondent. There was evidence introduced which tended to show that one of respondent's foremen admonished Ferland to give up his union activities. The evidence indicated that Ferland was one of those most actively engaged in union affairs.

The respondent introduced evidence to show that it had an express policy not to interfere with union activities of its employees; that in the case of Ferland it transferred him to unskilled work because of a vulgar remark made by him to Wahlstrom; that Ferland was unable to get along with his fellow employees; that it did not discharge Ferland but rather that he voluntarily quit his employment, and that Ferland in a report made to the Massachusetts Board of Unemployment Insurance gave as a reason for his right to compensation the fact that he was laid off for lack of work.

(2) Thomas Dyson, Sr., was employed by respondent on September 22, 1940. He is a tinner and galvanizer with a long record of experience in this field. He was employed as an operator on frame 47. On January 25, 1941, when frame 47 was temporarily shut down, Dyson was transferred to work on other frames and occasionally to unskilled work. On February 21, 1941, he was taken off frame 48 and was offered unskilled work at a lower rate of pay, which he refused. This did not constitute a voluntary quitting of his employment but was rather the refusal to exercise the option given to employees to accept unskilled work to make up their work week...