Extract
Iowa Packing Co., 1140 (2003)
The Iowa Packing Company and Joseph L. Walsh, an attorney with Hedberg, Owens & Hedberg. Case 18-CA-16289-1
April 30, 2003 DECISION AND ORDER BY CHAIRMAN BATTISTA AND MEMBERS LIEBMAN AND WALSH On December 19, 2002, Administrative Law Judge William L. Schmidt issued the attached decision. The Respondent filed exceptions and a supporting brief.1The National Labor Relations Board has delegated its authority in this proceeding to a three-member panel. The Board has considered the decision and the record in light of the exceptions and briefs and has decided to affirm the judge's rulings, findings,2 and conclusions3 and to adopt the recommended Order. ORDER The National Labor Relations Board adopts the recommended Order of the administrative law judge and orders that the Respondent, The Iowa Packing Company, Des Moines, Iowa, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action set forth in the Order. Timothy B. Kohls, Esq., for the General Counsel.Kevin J. Driscoll and Brian L. Stowe, Esqs. (Finley, Alt, Smith, Scharnberg, Craig, Hilmes & Gaffney, P.C.), of Des Moines, Iowa, for the Respondent.Joseph L. Walsh, Esq. (Hedberg, Owens, & Hedberg, P.C.), of Des Moines, Iowa , for the Charging Party. 1 The Respondent also requested oral argument. The request is denied as the record, exceptions, and brief adequately present the issues and the positions of the parties. 2 The Respondent has excepted to some of the judge's credibility findings. The Board's established policy is not to overrule an administrative law judge's credibility resolutions unless the clear preponderance of all the relevant evidence convinces us that they are incorrect. Standard Dry Wall Products, 91 NLRB 544 (1950), enfd. 188 F.2d 362 (3d Cir. 1951). We have carefully examined the record and find no basis for reversing the findings. In adopting the judge's finding that the Respondent violated Sec. 8(a)(1) by discharging employees for engaging in a protected work stoppage, we do not rely on the statements set forth in the seventh paragraph of sec. II,B,3, of his decision, or on the statement in the preceding paragraph that: "To employees, it surely appeared that Respondent intended to conduct business as usual with the morning processing ...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
