National Labor Relations Board v. Schwartz, 11124.
| Decision Date | 22 February 1945 |
| Docket Number | No. 11124.,11124. |
| Citation | 146 F.2d 773 |
| Parties | NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. SCHWARTZ. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
Alvin J. Rockwell, Gen. Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, and Malcolm F. Halliday, Associate Gen. Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, both of Washington, D. C., and LeRoy Marceau, Regional Atty., National Labor Relations Board, of New Orleans, La., for petitioner.
Emil Corenbleth, of Dallas, Tex., for respondent.
Before SIBLEY, WALLER, and LEE Circuit Judges.
Having found that the Respondent discharged employee Leona Presley because of her union activities and because she was organizing a movement among the employees to secure overtime work, and that a discharge for the latter reason also discourages membership in a labor union, and having ordered the Respondent to cease and desist the labor practices that were adjudged to be unfair and to offer reinstatement to Leona Presley and to make her whole for any loss of pay that she may have suffered by reason of her discharge, the Board now petitions this Court to enforce said order.
It is undisputed that the discharged employee had procured and made available to a number of the employees of the Respondent application cards for membership in the union, and that certain employees, including the discharged employee, had signed such application cards, and that they had been returned to the union.
There is substantial and convincing evidence that the forelady of the Respondent, believing that the discharged employee was circulating cards, or a petition, to present to the company for the allowance of additional overtime work, discharged Mrs. Presley for that reason. The Board, however, found that the forelady discharged her for her union activities. It is true that the cards which she aided in circulating were applications for membership in the union, but the evidence shows that the forelady evidently had mistaken the purpose of the cards and believed they were part of an effort to secure overtime work for the employees. There is no proof whatever that Mrs. Norris, the forelady, knew that the cards were for membership in the union. The testimony as to the statements of the forelady on the reason for the discharge justifies the inference that the forelady believed that the cards were part of a movement to obtain additional overtime as well as the conclusion that this was the real reason...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hugh H. Wilson Corporation v. NLRB
...Co., 167 F.2d 983, 988, 6 A.L.R.2d 408 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 335 U.S. 845, 69 S.Ct. 68, 93 L.Ed. 395 (1948); and NLRB v. Schwartz, 146 F.2d 773, 774 (5th Cir. 1945). 6 Apparently petitioner's plant was not unionized. "The joining in protests or demands, even by a small group of employee......
-
Illinois Ruan Transport Corporation v. NLRB
...lawfully to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of mutual aid, outside of a union, is specified by the Act." NLRB v. Schwartz, 146 F.2d 773, 774 (5 Cir. 1945). Balancing the concern between individual grievances asserted by employees vis-a-vis grievances made through union repres......
-
Michigan Employment Relations Com'n v. Reeths-Puffer School Dist., REETHS-PUFFER
...situated. Hugh H. Wilson Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 414 F.2d 1345, 1347 (CA 3, 1969); National Labor Relations Board v. Schwartz, 146 F.2d 773, 774 (CA 5, 1945); Joanna Cotton Mills Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 176 F.2d 749, 752 (CA 4, 1949); National Labor Relations......
-
Kellogg Company v. NLRB, 71-1367.
...the most literal sense, as nobody doubts.\' See also N. L. R. B. v. Greensboro Coca Cola Bottling Co., 180 F.2d 840 (C.A. 4); N. L. R. B. v. Schwartz, 146 F.2d 773 (C.A. This, however, does not mean that an employee may refuse to cross another Union's picket line for personal reasons. N. L.......