National Labor Relations Board v. Elixir Industries

Good Law
682 F.2d 867·111 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2072·1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 16959
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 30, 198281-7245California399 words

Opinion

Opinion

Reinhardt, J.

The National Labor Relations Board requests enforcement of its bargaining order against Elixir Industries. The Company refused to bargain with the Wholesale Delivery Drivers and Salesmen Local 848, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of Amer-ica, contending, in defense of the alleged violation of section 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158 (a)(5) (1976), that the use of a student legal assistant as a hearing officer in the representation hearing rendered certification improper. We enforce the order.

A hearing may be conducted by an “officer or employee” of the regional office. National Labor Relations Act, § 9(c)(1), 29 U.S.C. § 159 (c)(1) (1976). Normally, a hearing officer will be an attorney or field examiner but may be another qualified official. 29 C.F.R. § 101.20 (1981). The hearing officer makes no findings or recommendations. His function is to insure that the record contains the pertinent facts necessary for determination of the case by the Regional Director. 29 C.F.R. § 102.64 (1981).

Respondent does not question the fact that a student assistant is an “employee” within the meaning of the statute. There…

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.