Extract
International Harvester Co., 966 (1984)
DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
International Harvester Company and Edward Roberts and Carroll Childress United Automobile, Aerospace & Agricultural Implement Workers of America, UAW, AFL-CIO, and its affiliated Local Union No. 988 and Edward Roberts and Carroll Childress. Cases 26-CA-9174, 26-CA-9312, 26-CB-1773, and 26-CB- 179916 February 1984 DECISION AND ORDERBY CHAIRMAN DOTSON AND MEMBERSZIMMERMAN AND DENNISOn 30 August 1982 Administrative Law Judge Lawrence W. Cullen issued the attached decision.The General Counsel filed exceptions and a supporting brief, the Respondent Unions filed cross-exceptions and a supporting brief, the General Counsel filed a brief in answer to the Respondent Unions' cross-exceptions, and the General Counsel moved that the Board reopen the record to receive a stipulation from the Respondent Unions and the Respondent Employer concerning certain events which transpired since the conclusion of the hearing.The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a threemember panel.The Board has considered the decision and record in light of the exceptions and briefs and has decided to affirm the judge's rulings, findings, and conclusions only to the extent consistent with this Decision and Order.The judge found, and we agree, that the Respondent Employer violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act and that the Respondent Unions violated Section 8(b)(l)(A) and (2) of the Act by enforcing a provision in their collective-bargaining agreement, and supplements thereto, which accords preferred seniority status for layoff purposes to certain local union officers who do not perform stewardlike functions in their official capacities. As set forth in the judge's decision, the disputed union officers-the financial secretary-treasurer, recording secretary, guide, sergeant-at-arms, and trusteesperform a variety of functions relating to the internal affairs of the Local. Each of these officers performs his official duties outside the workplace during nonworking hours. None of them is involved with the administration of the collectivebargaining agreement or grievance handling.Based on these findings, ...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
