Extract
Colonial Shirt Corp., 711 (1951)
with, restraining, and coercing its employees in the excercise of the rights guaranteed under the Act.
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, and upon the entire record, the undersigned makes the following :CONCLUSIONS OF LAw 1. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union 1676, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, is a labor organization within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act.2. All production and maintenance employees, excluding office and clerical employees, guards, professional and supervisory employees, as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.3. All office and clerical employees, excluding production and maintenance employees, guards, professional and supervisory employees, as defined in the Act, constitute a unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (b) of the Act.4. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local Union 1676, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, was, on December 6, 1950, and has since been, at all times material thereafter, the exclusive representative of all the employees in each of the aforesaid units for the purposes of collective bargaining within the meaning of Section 9 (a) of the Act.5. By refusing on or about January 17, 1951, and at all times thereafter, including on or about March 1, 1951, and on or about March 29, 1951, to bargain collectively with International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers,- Local Union 1676, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, as the exclusive representative of the employees in each of the aforesaid units, and by unilaterally granting a wage increase to said employees on or about March 1, 1951, without prior consultation with the Union, Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (5) of the Act.6. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the Respondent has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (a) (]) of the Act.7. The allegation that the Respondent discriminated in regard to the hire and tenure and terms and conditions of employment of R. D. Cooper, J. E. Maner,Elmo Smith, and Carlton Spalding, to discourage membership in a labor organization, in violation of Section 8 (a) (3), has not been sustained by the preponderance of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence.8. The aforesaid unf...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
