Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co. v. National Labor Relations Board

Good Law
171 F.2d 956·23 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2249·1949 U.S. App. LEXIS 3545
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 13, 1949No. 11514California494 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Healy, J.

This matter is here on petition of Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Company to set aside an order of the National Labor Relations Board, and on the Board’s cross-petition for the enforcement of its order.

The case relates to Colgate’s discharge of and its refusal to reinstate certain employees, thirty-seven in number, a course determined by the Board to be discriminatory under § 8(1) and (3) of the Act. 29 U.S.C.A. § 158 (1, 3). The illegality of Colgate’s conduct, as determined by the Board, resides in its discharge of the employees pursuant to a closed-shop contract on demand of the union party thereto which had suspended the employees because of their activities in favor of a rival union at a time when activities looking toward a change of bargaining representatives were appropriate.

The closed-shop contract was between Colgate and a local of the CIO. It was entered into in 1941 for a term of indefinite duration, that is, “until changes become necessary because of conditions beyond the control of the Company or are requested by the employees through their representatives.” A condition of employment was that employees be “members in good standing” of the union. On July 24, 1945, a…

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.