Labor Board v. Fansteel Metallurgical Corp.
306 U.S. 240 (1939)

Annotate this Case

U.S. Supreme Court

Labor Board v. Fansteel Metallurgical Corp., 306 U.S. 240 (1939)

Labor Board v. Fansteel Metallurgical Corp.

No. 436

Argued January 12, 13, 1939

Decided February 27, 1939

306 U.S. 240

Syllabus

1. Seizure and forcible retention of an employer's factory buildings by employees, in a "sit-down" strike, is good cause for their discharge. P. 306 U. S. 252.

2. The National Labor Relations Act does not undertake to abrogate the right of an employer to refuse to retain in his employ those who illegally take and hold possession of his property. P. 306 U. S. 255.

3. The National Labor Relations Act is not to be construed as compelling employers to retain persons in their employ regardless of their unlawful conduct. In recognizing the right to strike, it contemplates a lawful strike, and where a strike, even though actuated by unfair labor practices of the employer, is initiated

Page 306 U. S. 241

and conducted in lawlessness by the seizure and retention of the employer's property, and the strikers are discharged because of their lawlessness, they do not remain "employees" within the meaning of § 2(3), and are not within the authority to reinstate "employees" reposed in the Board by § 10(c). P. 306 U. S. 256.

4. The provision of § 10(c) of the Act, by which the Board may require an employer to take such affirmative action as will "effectuate the policies" of the Act, does not authorize the Board to require reemployment of men who have been discharged for such unlawful conduct. P. 306 U. S. 257.

5. Strikers who aided and abetted a "sit-down" strike are in no better case than the "sit-down" strikers themselves. Assuming that, through not having been formally discharged, they retained the status of "employees" by virtue of § 2(3), that provision does not automatically reinstate them, and the provision that the Board may require "such affirmative action, including reinstatement of employees," as will "effectuate the policies" of the Act, will not countenance an order requiring reinstatement in such circumstances. P. 306 U. S. 259.

6. An order of the National Labor Relations Board requiring reinstatement of employees must be supported by specific findings. P. 306 U. S. 261.

7. An order of the Board that the employer bargain with a particular organization as exclusive representative of employees should not be enforced where, by reason of valid discharges and new employments, there is no ground to conclude that the organization is the choice of a majority of the employees for the purpose of collective bargaining. P. 306 U. S. 261.

8. An order of the Board requiring an employer to withdraw recognition from an organization of employees should be upheld where there is substantial evidence that the formation of this organization was brought about through promotion efforts of the employer contrary to the provision of § 8(2) of the Act. P. 306 U. S. 262.

98 F.2d 375 affirmed with modifications.

Certiorari, 305 U.S. 590, to review a judgment setting aside an order of the National Labor Relations Board.

Page 306 U. S. 247

Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.