Extract
Hickman Garment Co., 1112 (1975)
Hickman Garment Company and Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, AFL-CIO. Case 9CA-6579
August 13, 1975 SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDERBY MEMBERS FANNING, JENKINS, AND PENELLO On May 8, 1975, Administrative Law Judge Marion C. Ladwig issued the attached Supplemental Decision in this proceeding. Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief.Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3(b) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel.The Board has considered the record and the attached Decision in light of the exceptions and brief and has decided to affirm the rulings, findings, and conclusions of the Administrative Law Judge and to adopt his recommended Order.ORDERPursuant to Section 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, the National Labor Relations Board adopts as its Order the recommended Order of the Administrative Law Judge and hereby orders that the Respondent, Hickman Garment Company, Hickman, Kentucky, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action set forth in the said recommended Order.SUPPLEMENTAL DECISIONSTATEMENT OF THE CASEMARION C. LADwIG, Administrative Law Judge : This is a supplemental proceeding to determine the amount of backpay due 11 discriminatees. On February 16, 1973, the Board issued an unpublished Order, adopting (in the absence of timely exceptions) the findings and conclusions of Administrative Law Judge Paul E. Weil in his December 27, 1972, Decision, in which he found that the Company (after a series of earlier violations) discriminatorily failed to recall the 11 laid-off employees and otherwise violated the National Labor Relations Act, as amended. On July 26, 1973, the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit entered its judgment, granting summary enforcement of the Board's Order and requiring the Company, the Respondent, to make the I1 employees whole for any loss of pay and to otherwise remedy the 8(a)(1), (3), and (5) violations of the Act.A controversy having arise...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
