International Assn. of Machinists v. Labor Board - 311 U.S. 72 (1940)


U.S. Supreme Court

International Assn. of Machinists v. Labor Board, 311 U.S. 72 (1940)

International Assn. of Machinists , Tool and Die Makers,

Lodge No. 35 v. National Labor Relations Board

No. 16

Argued October 24, 1940

Decided November 12, 1940

311 U.S. 72

Syllabus

1. The National Labor Relations Board, finding that a labor organization, having a closed shop contract with an employer, had been "assisted" in its organizational drive by unfair labor practices of the employer, was authorized to order the employer to cease and desist from giving effect to the contract. P. 311 U. S. 75.

2. The finding of the National Labor Relations Board in this case that a labor organization had been "assisted" by unfair labor practices of the employer is supported by substantial evidence. P. 311 U. S. 75.

3. The Board's findings in this case having been confirmed by the court below, there is no need here to review the evidence in detail. P. 311 U. S. 75.

4. In determining, upon the record of this case, whether a labor organization was "assisted" by unfair labor practices of the employer, the Board could properly consider not only the employer's activities during the organization's membership drive, but also previous and subsequent activities. P. 311 U. S. 79.

5. That, in respect of the period between the time as of which a labor organization claims to have obtained a majority of the workers in an appropriate unit and the date of the execution of a closed shop contract between it and the employer, the Board made no finding that the claimed majority was maintained by unfair labor practices is not material in this case. The finding of the Board that the labor organization did not represent an uncoerced majority of the employees in such unit when the closed shop contract was executed is adequate to support the conclusion that the maintenance, as well as the acquisition, of the alleged majority was wrongfully achieved. P. 311 U. S. 78.

6. An employer may be found under the National Labor Relations Act to have "assisted" a labor organization by unfair labor practices even though the employees through whose activities the employer is regarded as having so assisted were not employed in a "supervisory" capacity, and even though their acts were not

Page 311 U. S. 73

expressly authorized or were not such a might constitute a basis of employer liability under the doctrine of respondeat superior. Pp. 311 U. S. 79-80.

7. Where, as here, there is ample evidence to support an inference that the employees believed that certain solicitors, though bona fide members of a labor organization and professedly acting therefor, were in fact acting for and on behalf of the employer, the Board may justifiably find that the employees did not have the complete and unhampered freedom of choice which the Act contemplates. P. 311 U. S. 80.

8. Where, in a proceeding under § 10 of the National Labor Relations Act, the Board finds that a labor organization has been assisted by unfair labor practices of the employer, it may order the employer to deal exclusively, for purpose of collective bargaining, with a rival labor organization, and the Board may properly refuse to act upon a notice received from the first labor organization, prior to the issuance of its order, that that organization has obtained a majority of the employees in an appropriate bargaining unit. P. 311 U. S. 81.

71 App.D.C. 175, 110 F.2d 29, affirmed.

Certiorari, 309 U.S. 649, to review a decision affirming an order of the National Labor Relations Board.



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.