Extract
Texas Aluminum Co., Inc., 73 (1970)
TEXAS ALUMINUM COMPANY, INC Texas Aluminum Company, Inc and United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO Case 16-CA-3469
February 10, 1970 DECISION AND ORDERBy MEMBERS FANNING, BROWN, AND JENKINS On April 21, 1969, Trial Examiner A Norman Somers issued his Decision in the above 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 attached Trial Examiner's Decision He also found that the Respondent had not engaged in certain other unfair labor practices alleged in the complaint and recommended that such allegations be dismissed Thereafter, the Respondent and the General Counsel filed exceptions and supporting briefs The Respondent also filed an answering 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 three-member panel The Board has considered the Trial Examiner's Decision, the exceptions and briefs, and the entire record in this case, and hereby adopts the findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner only to the extent consistent herewith With respect to the allegation that employee Glen Holcomb was discriminatorily discharged for his union activities, the Trial Examiner concluded that there was not a preponderance of evidence to support the allegation and concluded that the discharge of Holcomb was not violative of Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act We disagree For the reasons detailed hereinafter, we find that the General Counsel established a prima facie case of a violation which Respondent failed to rebut Holcomb, an employee for approximately 3 1/2 years, was discharged on September 23, 1968, allegedly because of his activities on behalf of the Union Respondent contends Holcomb was discharged because his work was unsatisfactory and because of his absences from work As detailed more fully in the Trial Examiner's Decision, the record shows that the Union renewed its organizational campaign at Respondent's plant in August 1968 and that on Sunday, August 11, the Union held a meeting which was attended by upwards of 20 employees A few of the employees in attendance at this meeting, including Holcomb and William S Stuckey, volunteered to serve on the in-plant organizing committee Holcomb obtained a number of union authorization cards and thereafter openly solicited signatures from employees while going into the plant, on breaks, and at his dinner 73 hour During the first week after the union meeting,Holcomb obtained 15 signed authorization cards and 15 more the following week Thereafter, between August 23 and the date of his discharge,September 23, Holcomb continued soliciting signatures on his breaks but obtained only two to four more signed cards . On August 14, Cecil Morgan, a production supervisor and Holcomb's 'collateral' supervisor, told Holcomb 'if [he] didn't stop passing out cards - Union organization cards - and get out of the Union, that the Company wo...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
