Summary

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas National Labor Relations Board v…

We also believe the Court of Appeals was right in concluding that the contract on its face is not unlawful even though the foremen-who are union members-do the hiring. In the first place, the contract (unlike the General Laws) does not require journeymen and apprentices to be union members. In the second place, the provisions of the contract which we have set forth make the foremen 'solely the employers' agents,' as the Court of Appeals concluded.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas National Labor Relations Board v…

The Board's case comes down to the method by which those in the mail-room became journeymen. One could either take an apprentice training program or pass a competency examination. Apprentices were hired by the foremen; but the Court of Appeals found that there were no discriminatory practices in the actual hiring of apprentices. If a person followed the examination route, the contract provided for it to be given 'by impartial examiners qualified to judge journeyman competency selected by the parties hereto.' The examiners were union officials and the mail-room foremen.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of William O. Douglas William O. Douglas National Labor Relations Board v…

The record is barren of even the slightest hint that there has been discrimination in the conduct of the examinations. Availability, dependability and regularity of service, as well as mere competency, are valid nondiscriminatory considerations in determining the order of hire. The fact that one applicant is as competent as another, does not mean that the other may not properly be preferred on the basis of his other qualifications.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature