International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board

273 F.2d 833, 107 U.S. App. D.C. 19, 45 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2324, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 4638
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedDecember 30, 1959
Docket15055_1
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 273 F.2d 833 (International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 150, Afl-Cio v. National Labor Relations Board, 273 F.2d 833, 107 U.S. App. D.C. 19, 45 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2324, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 4638 (D.C. Cir. 1959).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a petition to review and set aside, and a cross-petition to enforce, a cease and desist order of the National Labor Relations Board dated February 12,1959.

The Board’s conclusion that the Union violated the Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq., was based on a finding that the Union and the Fluor Company, Inc., “in effect, agreed, through the master mechanic, Press, as their agent, to engage in and did engage in a hiring arrangement requiring all applicants for employment to be referred exclusively by [the Union], with preference for union members.” There is no substantial support in the record as a whole for this finding, or for the underlying finding that the Union’s “working rules” which Fluor agreed to follow included a provision from the Constitution of the International that “Each member shall hire none but those in good standing with a Union * * * ” There is no evidence that the Union’s hiring arrangement with Fluor was exclusive. Furthermore, the Board erred in making its order cover any possible agreements between the Union and cmy other employer, 1 and in finding that the Union coerced Fluor’s employees to join and should therefore refund their dues. The entire order will be set aside.

So ordered.

1

. International Brotherhood of Teamsters, etc. v. National Labor Relations Board, 104 U.S.App.D.C. 359, 365, 262 F.2d 456, 462; National Labor Relations Board v. Local 926, International Union of Operating Engineers, 267 F.2d 418, 420 (5 Cir.). And see National Labor Relations Board v. F. H. McGraw & Co., 206 F.2d 635, 641 (6 Cir.).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
273 F.2d 833, 107 U.S. App. D.C. 19, 45 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2324, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 4638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/international-union-of-operating-engineers-local-150-afl-cio-v-national-cadc-1959.