Stanley Forman Reed

“ It is because, in my opinion, there was only one unfair practice and that was the refusal to bargain. Hence I think the Express Publishing case exactly applies, and does so without necessity for extending the scope of its ruling as the Court's application appears to do.
In my judgment an employer does not commit an unfair labor practice when he does no more than exercise rights secured by the Federal Constitution and laws, including the Wagner Act. [19] That Act does not put him to the choice of giving up his rights or exercising them on pain of being found guilty of unfair practice. ”

“ By going ahead with wage adjustments without negotiation with the bargaining agent, it took a step which justified the conclusion of the Board as to the violation of Section 8 (1) . Such unilateral action minimizes the influence of organized bargaining. It interferes with the right of selforganization by emphasizing to the employees that there is no necessity for a collective bargaining agent. If successful in securing approval for the proposed increase of wages, it might well, as the Board points out, block the bargaining representative in securing further wage adjustments. ”

“ As the Board's selection of an appropriate unit to choose the employees' bargaining representative and the Board's subsequent certification of the representative chosen, section 9, is not judicially reviewable directly, petitioner takes the position that it committed the unfair labor practice of refusing to bargain with an accredited union, merely to open the way for judicial review of the certification. ”

“ Nothing in the Act requires an employer to maintain a union's prestige or to give it credit for originating all proposals which may have some future effect upon his relations with his employees. Section 8 (1) forbids interference, coercion and restraint upon employees, in the exercise of their rights, not the mere failure of the employer to magnify the union's influence. ”

“ There was evidence that those who work on men's clothing, speaking generally, belong to a different union organization than those who work on women's clothes. The Board considered the interchange of workers between the two groups. We think that there was ample testimony to support the Board's conclusion that the employees of the two busheling rooms were an appropriate unit, since these employees had a degree of self-organization and a special trade which sufficiently differentiated them from other employees. ”

“ For this reason it becomes important to state the different reasons why I think the order should be modified to eliminate any restraint based upon the finding of violation of § 8 (1) . It is not because this Court has power or discretion, when there are two substantial and different unfair practices, to modify the Board's order by restricting the relief to what is appropriate to prevent repeating only one or by other modification to eliminate relief appropriately designed by the Board to prevent repetition of unfair practices it has found to exist. ”

“ Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities, for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection.' 29 U.S.C.A. § 157.↑ 49 Stat. ”

“ No labor organization claimed to represent the entire body of employees. Therefore the Board determined to approve this unit as appropriate so that collective bargaining might start for these employees without waiting until more employees might be organized into a larger unit. ”

“ The company, it says, by including these employees, 'put the union on the spot,' so that it had no real choice. The argument shows concern for the union's 'spot,' but gives no recognition to the employer's. The Board does not urge that the company should have excluded these employees from the general application, with good reason. Had this been done, obviously the company would have laid itself open to a charge and a finding of unfair practice under § 8 (1) . The Board is unwilling, apparently, to put the employer in that dilemma. ”

“ The next morning the employees were told over the store address system of the application for a wage increase for all employees, except higher paid executives and those employees 'whose salaries have been fixed by closed shop agreements.' A short time later another reference to the application was made over the address system. ”

“ Form of Ballot. Petitioner objects to the certification because the ballot contained the name of the St. Louis Joint Council, United Retail, Wholesale & Department Store Employees, as a candidate for bargaining representative from the unit. This was the organization which was certified. ”