National Labor Relations Board v. San Francisco Typographical Union No. 21, International Typographical Union, Afl-Cio

The National Labor Relations Board (the Board) seeks to enforce its orders directing the Typographical Union to rescind the disciplinary actions the Union took against four members who were supervisory employees of the San Rafael Independent Journal (Journal). The Board contends that the Union may not punish these men for violating Union rules and policy, even though they crossed and worked behind the Union’s picket lines.

Gordon Dixon was the mechanical superintendent and the foreman of the composing room. On October 10, 1969, Dixon, exercising his authority as foreman, discharged Paul Austin because Austin took an afternoon off without permission. The Union voted to require Dixon to reinstate Austin, but Dixon refused. The President of the Union *1349 filed charges against Dixon, and, after a hearing, Dixon was fined $418.00.

The Board determined that the Union’s action was an unfair labor practice, and it ordered the Union to rescind the fine and expunge Dixon’s record.

Later, the Union disciplined Robert Dixon, Earl Dixon and Ernest Fingerlos because they crossed the Union’s picket line. On January 7, 1970, the Union struck the Journal after a breakdown in contract…

ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

In its petition for rehearing the Board has asked us to reconsider our decision that Section 8(b)(1)(B) does not prevent unions from fining supervisors who perform rank-and-file work behind a picket line.

The Board has asked us to consider NLRB v. Local 2150, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, 486 F.2d 602 (7th Cir. 1973), decided shortly after we issued our opinion. In that case strikebreaking supervisors held withdrawal cards which entitled them to pension benefits and waiver of reinstatement requirements. They were fined by the union for crossing picket lines and performing rank-and-file struck work. The Seventh Circuit found that the imposition of such fines was an unfair labor practice because the supervisors were exercising a proper managerial function and were therefore protected under the Act.

Our attention has also been called to International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers v. NLRB, 487 F.2d 1143 (D.C. Cir. 1973) (on rehearing in banc). In that case, also decided after our opinion was announced, the D. C. Circuit, in bane, on a rehearing, came to the opposite conclusion. That Court found, as we did, that although…

486 F.2d 1347 83 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2314 , 71 Lab.Cas. P 13,712 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. SAN FRANCISCO TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION NO. 21, INTERNATIONAL TYPOGRAPHICAL UNION, AFL-CIO, Respondent. Nos. 71-2949, 71-2987. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. May 18, 1973. Rehearing Denied Nov. 14, 1973. 1 Michael S. Winer (argued) NLRB, San Francisco, Cal., Peter G. Nash, Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, NLRB, Washington, D. C., Roy O. Hoffman, Director, Region 20, NLRB, San Francisco, Cal., Abigail Cooley Baskir, Atty., NLRB, Washington, D. C., for appellant. 2 Duane B. Beeson (argued) of Brundage, Neyhart, Grodin & Beeson, San Francisco, Cal., for appellee. 3 Nathan R. Berke (argued) of Severson, Werson, Berke & Melchior, San Francisco, Cal., for the charging party. 4 Nathan R. Berke, (argued) of Severson, Werson, Berke & Melchior, San Francisco, Cal., for San Rafael Independent Journal. 5 Before MERRILL and ELY, Circuit Judges, and SOLOMON, District Judge. * SOLOMON, District Judge: 6 The National Labor Relations Board (the Board) seeks to enforce its orders directing the Typographical Union to rescind the disciplinary actions…