Hoyer

By this action, George Henry Hoyer, the plaintiff, a discharged soldier, seeks to compel his restoration by the defendants, to his pre-war employment as hog buyer at his previous salary of $60 per week.

The defendants are meat packers. The action demands the benefit of the remedy established by the Selective Training and Service Act of 1940, 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 308(b).

In MacMillan v. Montecito Country Club, D.C.Cal., 1946, 65 F.Supp. 240, 242 , I had occasion to interpret this statute. The problem there involved was somewhat different,—whether a person occupied a position “in the employ of any employer”, or was an independent contractor. I held that the plaintiff, a golf professional, was not an independent contractor, because he was under the control of the employer. In determining the case, I called attention to the fact that the re-employment provision of this war statute should be given a liberal interpretation, saying: “As the object of the Selective Service & Training Act of 1940 was to insure that ‘the obligations and privileges of military training and service should be shared generally in accordance with a fair and just system,’ 50 U.S.C.A.Appendix, § 301(b), we are…