Extract
Pacemaker Corp., 987 (1958)
categories be recruited from the ranks of the Union' s weavers and apprentices, as well as a refusal to accede to the new method of operation.
Apart from the Union's manifest unwillingness to cooperate in Lindsay's plans by supplying its members to fill the new jobs, there is another factor that militates against the likelihood that such new jobs would be filled by the same persons or class of persons as manned the looms before the strike, namely, the weavers and their apprentices.It seems to me unrealistic to suppose that the weavers, highly skilled craftsmen, steeped in craft tradition, would have lightly submitted to downgrading to unskilled or semiskilled work at lower rates of pay.It appears far more probable that they would, at least initially, have resisted such downgrading by seeking other jobs in their craft and would have accepted the new jobs at Mentor only as a last resort, if at all. Under these circumstances, it seems to me that any assumption that the new jobs would from the outset have been performed by the same trade, craft, or class of employees as filled the old jobs is not warranted on the present record. It is my view, therefore, that the question in dispute was in essence not only whether Lindsay should break down the jobs at Mentor from skilled to less skilled work, but also whether the Mentor looms should be operated, on the one hand, by weavers and their apprentices, or on this other hand, by such persons as would be willing to work under the new conditions, who would not necessarily be of the same class as the former, but quite likely would be of a different class.' 9 It is immaterial, in my opinion, that, in view of Lindsay's willingness to employ union members on the new jobs at Mentor, the new class of employees might be members of the Union ( assuming, which seems questionable, that the Union would admit noncraftsmen to membership). That circumstance does not preclude a violation finding here, since, as I read Section 8 (b) (4) (D), the dispute need only be between two classes of employees, whether or not they are members of the same union . Nor is a violation finding precluded by the fact that at the time of the strike the work in question was being performed by the weavers, and the dispute related only to the future assignment of such work to persons not yet identified. See Anning-Johnson Company, 113 NLRB 1237, 1242.Pacemaker Corporation and International Union, United Automobile, Aircraft & Agricultural Implement Workers of America (UAW), AFL-CIO. Case No. 13-CA-2301. May 15, 1958 DECISION AND ORDEROn June 28, 1957, Trial Examiner Louis Plost issued his Intermediate Report in the above-entitled proceeding, finding that the 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 copy of the Inter120 NLRB No. 133.988 DECISIONS OF. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD mediate Report attached hereto. He also found that the Respondent had not engaged in other unfair labor.practices alleged in the complaint and recommended dismissal of those allegations.' Thereafter, the General Counsel and the Respondent each filed exceptions to the Intermediate Report with a supporting brief. The Respondent also requested oral argument. The request is hereby denied, as the record and briefs, in our opinion, adequately present the issues and positions of the parties.The Board, has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Examiner at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed. The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the Intermediate Report, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in the case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the'Trial Examiner, with the exceptions, modifications, and additions noted below.1. Like the Trial Examiner, we reject the Respondent's contention that this proceeding should be dismissed, or held in abeyance until an election has been conducted in the representation proceeding instituted by the Union. As the...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
