National Labor Relations Bd. v. Pugh and Barr, Inc.
| Decision Date | 09 April 1956 |
| Docket Number | No. 6369.,6369. |
| Parties | NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. PUGH AND BARR, Inc., Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fourth Circuit |
Rose Mary Filipowicz, Atty., N. L. R. B. (Theophil C. Kammholz, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Arnold Ordman, Atty., N. L. R. B., on the brief), for petitioner.
W. Paul McWhorter, Clarksburg, W. Va. (John S. Stump, Jr., Clarksburg, W. Va., on the brief), for respondent.
Before PARKER, Chief Judge, and SOPER and DOBIE, Circuit Judges.
This is the third time that this case has been before us. When it was first here a general enforcement order was entered. N. L. R. B. v. Pugh & Barr, Inc., 4 Cir., 194 F.2d 217. On the second occasion, we set aside an order of the Labor Board fixing the back pay of one Bramer to be paid under the original order and remanded the case to the Board with direction that it make specific findings of fact with respect to the matter and award to Bramer no more than the difference between what he could have earned by working for respondent if he had not been wrongfully discharged and what he could have earned elsewhere if he had used due diligence to secure other employment. N. L. R. B. v. Pugh & Barr, Inc., 4 Cir., 207 F.2d 409.
Upon remand, the Labor Board appointed an examiner who had not theretofore been connected with the case to conduct a hearing in accordance with our order. This was done and a lengthy hearing was held at which a great volume of testimony was taken. The examiner made a report to the Board containing detailed findings of fact, showing that Bramer had used due diligence in seeking other employment and that, with the exception of one minor item, he had been unable to obtain employment resulting in greater earnings than he had reported. The examiner reported that this failure on the part of Bramer to obtain employment for a greater portion of the period and to earn more wages was because of his age and because of labor conditions in the surrounding area. These findings were approved by the Board, which after analyzing them at considerable length, stated its conclusions as follows:
"In view of the above findings, the circumstances outlined in the Intermediate Report, and particularly the Trial Examiner\'s findings that this area in West Virginia is generally a labor surplus area and unemployment there was high during 1949,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
NLRB v. Madison Courier, Inc.
...569, 575 (5th Cir. 1966); Heinrich Motors, Inc. v. N. L. R. B., 403 F.2d 145, 148-149 (2nd Cir. 1968). 35 See N. L. R. B. v. Pugh & Barr, Inc., 231 F.2d 558, 559 (4th Cir. 1956); Mastro Plastics Corp., 136 NLRB 1342, 1359 (1962), enfd., 354 F.2d 170 (2nd Cir. 1965), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 9......
-
Wellington Mill Division, West Point Mfg. Co. v. NLRB
...have been decided in the first instance. See, e. g., N. L. R. B. v. Lester Bros., Inc., 301 F.2d 62 (4 Cir. 1962); N. L. R. B. v. Pugh & Barr, Inc., 231 F.2d 558 (4 Cir. 1956); N. L. R. B. v. School Timer Frocks, Inc., 224 F.2d 336 (4 Cir. 1955). Sound policy considerations buttress our dis......
-
Mitkovski v. N.L.R.B.
...and justified the payment of a back pay award that was large relative to the petitioner's interim earnings. NLRB v. Pugh & Barr, Inc., 231 F.2d 558, 559 (4th Cir.1956). In Mitkovski's case the record indicates that his earnings amounted to roughly fifteen percent of the back pay award. The ......
-
N.L.R.B. v. Overseas Motors, Inc.
...earnings were a result of his age and a job shortage in the area, rather than his own unwillingness to find a job. NLRB v. Pugh & Barr, Inc., 231 F.2d 558 (4th Cir.1956).) Here, Mitkovski claimed $14,621 in interim earnings, 13.52% of the $108,170 earned by the representative employee durin......