National Labor Relations Board v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.

Good Law
217 F.2d 366·34 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2412·1954 U.S. App. LEXIS 3813
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 28, 195414019_1California1,876 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fee, J.

In 1950, pursuant to government demand, respondent changed a working schedule in the maintenance department of its Trentwood mill. Under the bargaining agreement, there were meetings with the representatives of United Steel Workers of America, CIO, the bargaining unit, which objected to the change, but respondent insisted the schedules be placed into effect at a set deadline. Notwithstanding a “no strike” clause, absenteeism in the maintenance department, where a majority of employees were affiliates of A F of L craft unions prior to organization on a plant basis, reached 50.6 per cent and justified the Board finding that “a work stoppage in the nature of a strike” was involved. Respondent issued suspension slips for 111 employees for not reporting for work and 94 for inciting the stoppage. Grievance hearings were held under the contract. The company reinstated by far the greater number of those to whom suspension slips were given. In some cases, these restorations to duty carried pay during the period of layoff. 16 men were finally discharged, including Booth, Sullivan and Patten, whose discharges are here in question.

Upon complaint filed with the Board, a Trial Examiner took…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.