Extract
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., 148 (1968)
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation and General TRIAL EXAMINER'S DECISION Drivers, Warehousemen and Helpers Local Union 509, International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America. Case 11-CA-3460June 24, 1968 DECISION AND ORDERBy Members Brown , Jenkins, and Zagoria On April 9, 1968, Trial Examiner Frederick U.Reel issued his Decision in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that Respondent had engaged in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and recommending that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action, as set forth in the attached Trial Examiner's Decision. He also found that Respondent had not engaged in certain other unfair labor practices and recommended that such allegations of the complaint be dismissed.Thereafter, the Respondent filed exceptions to the Decision and a supporting brief. The Charging Party filed cross-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 powers in connection with this case to a threemember panel.The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Trial Examiner's Decision , the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner as modified herein.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 Trial Examiner, and hereby orders that the Respondent, Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation, Aiken, South Carolina, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall take the action set forth in the Trial Examiner 's Recommended Order, as so modified:Change the periods at the end of paragraph 1(b) of the Order and the third indented paragraph of the Appendix to semicolons and add the following:'provided, however, that the Respondent is not required to revoke any such benefits that it has granted.' FREDERICK U. REEL , Trial Examiner: This case, heard at Augusta , Georgia, on February 15, 1968,1 pursuan...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
