National Labor Rel. Board v. Johnson Steel & Wire Co., No. 3835.

CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit
Writing for the CourtMAHONEY and WOODBURY, Circuit , and PETERS
Citation134 F.2d 785
PartiesNATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. JOHNSON STEEL & WIRE CO.
Decision Date01 April 1943
Docket NumberNo. 3835.

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.


134 F.2d 786

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...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • National Labor Relations Board v. Bird Mach. Co., No. 4219.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • May 20, 1947
    ...engaged in unfair labor practices is not supported by substantial evidence. See N.L.R.B. v. Johnson Steel & Wire Co., 1 Cir., 1943, 134 F.2d 785, 787. 161 F.2d 592 Respondent seeks to rebut the evidence relied upon by the Board and to discredit the Board's witness but our sole function ......
  • National Labor Relations Board v. Franks Bros. Co., No. 3872.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • July 27, 1943
    ...Steamship Corp., 1940, 309 U.S. 206, 60 S. Ct. 493, 84 L.Ed. 704; National Labor Relations Board v. Johnson Steel & Wire Co., 1 Cir., 134 F.2d 785, decided April 1, Respondent asserts that the testimony given by Lerman in this regard is unreliable and that throughout examination and cro......
  • Commercial Standard Ins. Co. v. Blankenship, No. 9130.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • April 6, 1943
    ...the laundry company, while using the car for the purpose of picking up clothing to be dry cleaned, collided with Mrs. Blankenship, causing 134 F.2d 785 injuries to her, for which she brought suit on December 28, 1938, against the partners, Hester and Wakefield, and the driver of the car. Mr......
3 cases
  • National Labor Relations Board v. Bird Mach. Co., No. 4219.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • May 20, 1947
    ...engaged in unfair labor practices is not supported by substantial evidence. See N.L.R.B. v. Johnson Steel & Wire Co., 1 Cir., 1943, 134 F.2d 785, 787. 161 F.2d 592 Respondent seeks to rebut the evidence relied upon by the Board and to discredit the Board's witness but our sole function ......
  • National Labor Relations Board v. Franks Bros. Co., No. 3872.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (1st Circuit)
    • July 27, 1943
    ...Steamship Corp., 1940, 309 U.S. 206, 60 S. Ct. 493, 84 L.Ed. 704; National Labor Relations Board v. Johnson Steel & Wire Co., 1 Cir., 134 F.2d 785, decided April 1, Respondent asserts that the testimony given by Lerman in this regard is unreliable and that throughout examination and cro......
  • Commercial Standard Ins. Co. v. Blankenship, No. 9130.
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (6th Circuit)
    • April 6, 1943
    ...the laundry company, while using the car for the purpose of picking up clothing to be dry cleaned, collided with Mrs. Blankenship, causing 134 F.2d 785 injuries to her, for which she brought suit on December 28, 1938, against the partners, Hester and Wakefield, and the driver of the car. Mr......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT