A. R. Gieringer Tool Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Jul 18, 1962

137 N.L.R.B. 1377 (N.L.R.B. 1962)

A. R. GIERINGER TOOL CORP. 1377
A. R. Gieringer Tool Corp. and Tool & Die Makers Lodge No. 78,
International Association of Machinists , AFL-CIO. Cases Nos.
13-CA-3878 and 13-CA-./.080. July 18, 1962
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION
On December 13, 1961, the Board issued its Decision and Order in
the above-entitled matter,' finding that the Respondent had engaged
in and was engaging in certain unfair labor practices and ordering
that it cease and desist therefrom and take certain affirmative action as
set forth therein. On its own motion, the Board has reconsidered its
decision in this proceeding and hereby modifies and amends its Deci-
sion and Order in the following respect :
In its original Decision and Order, the Board reversed Trial Ex-
aminer Whittemore's conclusion that the Respondent had not dis-
criminatorily discharged three employees, one of whom was Irving
Groves. In partial support of its finding that the reasons given by
Respondent for Groves' discharge were pretexts, the Board stated that
Groves had not expressed an intention to leave at any time in order to
start his own business. The Board was in error in this respect since
Groves in fact testified that when Plant Superintendent Mohr spoke
to him some weeks before his discharge about his activities on behalf
of the Union and had offered to make him a foreman, Groves said that
he was thinking about leaving the following March to start his own
business. It is also true that Mohr told Groves when he discharged
Groves that it was because of Groves' intention to leave anyway. Since
we are satisfied, however, that there would not have been any perma-
nent reduction in force among Respondent's employees at this time if it
had not been for the Union's campaign, and in view of other record evi-
dence, such as Mohr's hostility to the Union and to Groves in particu-
lar because he believed that Groves was responsible for the Union's
presence , we are persuaded that Groves was selected for layoff because
he was actively engaged in furthering the Union's organizing efforts
rather than because Respondent believed that he would be quitting
after some months.
Upon reconsideration of the entire record in this case, the Board
hereby modifies and amends its decision to correct its misstatement
of the record, but in all other respects affirms its findings that the
General Counsel established by a preponderance of all the evidence
that Respondent was opposed to the organizational campaign, that its
stated reasons for the discharge of three active adherents of the Union
1134 NLRB 1214
137 NLRB No. 152.
649856-63-vol. 137-88
1378 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
were pretexts, and that it discharged them because of their union
adherence.
MEMBERS RODGERS and FANNING took no part in the consideration of
the above Supplemental Decision.
Marcus Trucking Company, Inc . and Dairy Transportation
Drivers, Helpers and Terminal Employees , Local 770, Inter-
national Brotherhood of Teamsters , Chauffeurs and Helpers
of America and Local 602, International Brotherhood of
Teamsters , Chauffeurs, Warehousemen and Helpers of Amer-
ica, Party to a Contract. Case No. 2-CA-6031. July 18, 1962
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
'On March 11, 1960, the Board issued a Decision and Order in the
above-entitled case,' finding that the Respondent had engaged in un-
fair labor practices in violation of Section 8(a) (1), (2), (3), and (5)
of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, and directing, inter
,alia, that the Respondent (1) make the employees in the appropriate
unit whole for any loss of earnings which they may have incurred by
reason of the elimination of overtime pay by the Respondent; (2) re-
imburse all employees in the appropriate unit for all membership
dues, initiation fees, and assessments which they paid to Local 602 as
-a condition of employment during the period commencing May 30,
1958; and (3) restore employee Kenneth Bedford to that position
,on the seniority roster to which he was rightfully entitled and make
him whole for any loss of pay which he suffered as a result of his re-
-duction in seniority.
On January 26, 1961, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Second Circuit entered its decision,' affirming the Board's findings of
unfair labor practices and enforcing the Board's Order with respect
to the loss of earnings resulting from the elimination of overtime pay
and with respect to the backpay owing to Kenneth Bedford, but modi-
fying the Board's Order by limiting the reimbursement of dues and
•other fees "to those employees who continued to pay dues to Local 770
and for the period of such payment, not, however, later than the date
when our order becomes final."
On July 31, 1961, the Board's Regional Director for the Second
Region issued a backpay specification and, on September 27, 1961, the
Respondent filed an answer thereto. Upon appropriate notice issued
by the Regional Director, a hearing was held before Trial Examiner
1126 NLRB 1080.
2 286 F. 2d 583.
137 NLRB No. 141.