Extract
Philadephia Ambulance Service, Inc., 1070 (1978)
DELCISIONS OF' NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Philadelphia Ambulance Service, Inc. and Teamsters Local No. 115, affiliated with International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America Teamsters Local No. 115, affiliated with International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of America and Martin J. Sobol.
Cases 4-CA-8435 and 4 CB-2998September 29, 1978 DECISION AND ORDERBY MEMBERS JENKINS, MURPHY. AND TRUESDAI.E On December 15, 1977, Administrative Law Judge Julius Cohn issued the attached Decision in this proceeding. Thereafter, Respondent Employer filed exceptions and a supporting brief, Respondent Union filed cross-exceptions together with supporting brief and an answer to Respondent Employer's exceptions.and General Counsel filed cross-exceptions and a supporting brief.Pursuant to the provision 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 briefs and has decided to affirm the rulings, findings,' and conclusions2 of the Administrative Law Judge.' to ' Respondents have excepted to certain credibility findings made bs the Administrative Iaw Judge. It is the Board's established policy not to overrule an Administrative Law Judge's resolutions with respect to credibility unless the clear preponderance of all of the relevant evidence convinces us that the resolutions are incorrect Standard Dn Wiall Products. Ins., 91NILRB 544 (1950). enfd. 188 F.2d 362 (C'.A. 3, 1951). We have carefully examined the record and find no basis for reversing his findings.The General Counsel has filed exceptions%to the Administrative Law Judge's dismissal of complaint allegations that Respondent Emploer unlawfully threatened its employees with plant closure on November 24. 1976. In support thereof. General Counsel contends that the Administrative Law Judge's credibility findings regarding the alleged threat are based onl nmistake of fact. We find it unnecessary to decide whether Respondent further violated the Act by the additional alleged conduct since the threat, if made.is in any event cumulative.General Counsel has further excepted to the Administrative l.aw Judge's failure to find an additional violation iof Sec. 8(bX I)I(A) of the Act based on striker Larry O'Brien's conduct on February 20, 1977. in pulling his car to a stop behind that of' nonstriker Paul Vollmer as Vollmer was proceeding home: hitting Vollmer's car; and inviting Vollmer to fight. I'he incident did not occur while picketing was in progress: nor does it appear from the record that it arose out of events which occurred at or near the picket line. UInder these circumstances. we conclude that the Union was not responsible flr O'Brien's conduct on this occasion. Accordingly, we shall dismiss this allegation of the complaint.2 The Administrative Law Judge found that. on December 8. Respondent Employer questioned employees I arry and Hugh O'Brien as to how each 'stood with the ULnion.' However, through inadvertence, he failed to rule on the legality of the employer's statement. We find that Respondent Employer, by questioning the O'Briens on this occasion. unlawfully interrogated employees concerning their union sympathies in violation of' Sec 8(a)( ) of the Act.3On January 5, 1977, while nonstriking employee Anthony Hope was at modify his remedy.4 and to adopt his recommended Order.? The Administrative Law Judge concludes that a bargaining order is necessary and appropriate to remedy Respondent Employer's unfair labor practices herein.6We agree.The Union obtained signed authorization cards...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
