Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 9, 1936

1 N.L.R.B. 503 (N.L.R.B. 1936)

In the Matter of JONES & LAUGHLIN STEEL CORPORATION and AMAL-
GAMATED ASSOCIATION OF IRON, STEEL & TIN WORl1ERS OF NORTH
AMERICA, BEAVER VALLEY LODGE No. 200
Case No. C-57.-Decided April 9, 1936
Iron and Steel Industry Interference, Restraint or Coercion: surveillance
of and questioning regarding organizational activities and meetings; terrorism
against union organizers and leaders ; questioning employees regarding union
affiliation ; preventing union meetings ; expressed opposition to labor organi-
zation ; villifying union ; intimidation of union members-Employee Repre-
sentation Plan: form and operation-Discrimination: allocation of work; demo-
tion, transfer, wage reduction ; discharge-Reinstatement Ordered-Back Pay:
awarded.
Mr. Robert B. Watts, Mr. Robert H. Kleeb, Mr. Thomas I. Emerson
and Mr. A. L. Wirin for the Board.
Thorp, Bostwick, Reed ct Armstrong, by Mr. Earl F. Reed, Mr.
John E. Laughlin and Mr. Donald W. Ebberts, of Pittsburgh, Pa., for
respondent.
Mr. Alexander H. Schullman and Mr. Aaron Sapiro, of Pittsburgh,
Pa., for the Union.
Mr. Louis L. Jaffe, of counsel to the Board.
DECISION
STATEMENT OF CASE
On January 23, 1936, Beaver Valley Lodge No. 200, of the Amal-
gamated Association of Iron, Steel and Tin Workers of North
America, hereinafter referred to as the Union, filed a charge with
the Regional Director for the Sixth Region against the Jones &
Laughlin Steel Corporation, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, hereinafter
referred to as the respondent, charging the respondent with viola-
tions of Section 8, subdivisions (1) and (3) of the National Labor
Relations Act, approved July 5, 1935, hereinafter referred to as the
Act Thereupon, a complaint and notice of hearing signed by Clin-
ton S. Golden, Regional Director for the Sixth Region, were issued
and duly served upon the respondent. The complaint charged the
respondent with violations of Section 8, subdivisions (1) and (3)
because of the discharge of and refusal to reinstate 12 1 employees
1 At the hearing the complaint with respect to one of these employees , W. J. Collins
was withdrawn at his request. He stated in a letter addressed to the Board that he
feared the use of his name would do him harm.
97571-36-vol i 33 503
504 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and the demotion of one employee, all at its Aliquippa Works, for
the reason that they joined and assisted the Union and engaged in
concerted activities with other employees at the Aliquippa Works
for the purpose of collective bargaining and other mutual aid and
protection.
The respondent filed a special appearance and answer. For answer
it admitted the discharges and, demotion, but averred that in all cases,
they were made because of inefficiency and violation of the respond-
ent's rules. The respondent further claimed that the Act violates
the Fifth and Seventh Amendments to the Constitution of the United
States, that it confers judicial power on the Board in contravention
of that Constitution, and that the activities of respondent are intra-
state and not subject to regulation by Congress or the Board.
By order of the Board dated February 27, 1936, the proceeding was
transferred to and continued before the Board in accordance with
Article IT, Section 35 of National Labor Relations Board Rules and
Regulations-Series 1.
A hearing was held on March 2 and 3, 1936 at Pittsburgh, Penn-
sylvania, before the Board, at which hearing full opportunity to be
heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses and to introduce evi-
dence bearing on the issues, was afforded to all parties. The Board
and the respondent both presented evidence as to the nature of the
respondent's business operations. The respondent then moved to.
dismiss on the ground that on the evidence it conclusively appeared
that neither the respondent's operations nor its labor relations were
in or affected interstate commerce. The motion to dismiss was
denied. Thereupon, the respondent's counsel took no further part in
the hearing and withdrew. A further hearing was held in Washing-
ton, D. C., April 2 to April 8, 1936.
Upon the evidence adduced at the hearing and from the entire
record now before it, including the transcript of the hearing and
exhibits introduced, the Board makes the following :
FINDINGS OF FACT
I. THE RESPONDENT
The Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation is a Pennsylvania corpo-
ration which, together with its subsidiaries-19 in number-manu-
factures and distributes a widely diversified line of steel and pig-
iron. The respondent is the fourth largest producer of steel in the-
United States. It has an annual capacity of 3,189,700 N.T. coke;
3,000,000 G.T. pig-iron; 3,660,000 G.T. steel ingots; and 2,837,600-
G.T. of finished steel hot rolled products. In the year 1934 the
respondent shipped 880,031 N.T. of steel products, valued (together
with certain other gross receipts) at $47,957,338.36. It has two.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 505
plants, one in Pittsburgh and one nearby in Aliquippa. The assets
of it and its consolidated companies were valued, as of December 31,
1934, at $181,532,641.36. It employs over 22,000 persons, about 10,000
of them at its Aliquippa plant.
In a registration statement filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission by the respondent, it characterized itself as "completely
integrated, owning and operating ore, coal, and limestone properties,
lake and river transportation facilities and terminal railroads located
at its manufacturing plants, at Pittsburgh and Aliquippa, Penn-
sylvania ". The respondent owns or controls mines in Michigan and
Minnesota estimated to contain approximately 60,000,000 tons of iron
ore. It operates four ore steamships on the Great Lakes, used in
transportation of ore to its factories. It owns coal mines in Penn-
sylvania estimated to contain 600,000,000 tons of recoverable coal.
Much of this coal is located adjacent to the Monongahela River. The
respondent owns and operates ten tow boats and 165 steel barges
used in carrying coal from the mines to its factories. The respondent
owns limestone properties in various places in Pennsylvania and
West Virginia. Iron ore, coal, and limestone are the three important
materials used in producing pig-iron and steel.
The respondent owns and operates the Monongahela Connecting
Railroad-40.99 miles of standard gauge track-which connects the
plants of the Pittsburgh works and forms an interconnection with
the Pennsylvania, New York Central and Baltimore and Ohio rail-
road systems at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. This line has 30 locomo-
tives and 713 freight cars. It owns the Aliquippa and Southern
Railroad Company-43.20 miles of standard gauge track-which con-
nects the Aliquippa Works with the Pittsburgh and Lake Erie (part
of the New York Central System). The Aliquippa line has 19 loco-
motives and 614 freight cars. It reports to the Interstate Commerce
Commission as a common carrier. Thus, by means of its own rail-
roads, the respondent ships its raw materials into its works and ships
out the finished and semi-finished products. The cars of the Ali-
quippa line, for example, are carried to the point of loading or un-
loading and there are handled by the respondent's employees with the
help of the respondent's cranes and loading equipment. A system of
tracks connects all parts of the works, buildings, and yards with each
other and with the rails of the Aliquippa line and from that to the
New York Central line. The respondent is the largest shipper over
the Pittsburgh and Lake Erie. More than 9751o of the shipments
originating at Aliquippa are made by the respondent. If operations
at the Aliquippa Works were interrupted by labor difficulties or
otherwise the business of the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie-an interstate
carrier-would be seriously crippled.
506 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
The respondent has far-flung properties and many employees en-
gaged in the distribution of its products. Much of the product is
shipped to its warehouses in Chicago, Detroit, Cincinnati, and Mem-
phis-to the last two places by means of its own barges and trans-
portation equipment. In Long Island City, New York and in New
Orleans it operates structural steel fabricating shops in connection
with the warehousing of semi-finished materials sent from its Works.
Through one of its wholly-owned subsidiaries it owns, leases and
operates stores, warehouses, and yards for the distribution of equip-
ment and supplies for drilling and operating oil and gas mills and
for pipe lines, refineries, and pumping stations. It has sales offices
in 20 cities in the United States and a wholly-owned subsidiary de-
voted exclusively to distributing its product in Canada. It advertises
in newspapers and magazines. Approximately 75 per cent of its
product is shipped out of Pennsylvania.2
The ramifications of the Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation are
thus as broadly extended as the nation itself. It is impossible to
isolate the operations of the Works in Pittsburgh and Aliquippa or
to consider them as detached, separate-"local"-phenomena. These
Works might be likened to a heart of a self-contained, highly inte-
grated body. They draw in the raw materials from Michigan, Min-
nesota, West Virginia, Pennsylvania in part through arteries and
by means controlled by the respondent; they transform the materials
and then pump them out to all parts of the nation through the vast
mechanism which the respondent has elaborated.
In these and many other respects the respondent shows the char-
acteristics of the steel industry as a whole. This industry had, as
z The following are the figures for railroad shipments into and out of the Aliquippa
Works in July, 1935-a characteristic month.
Carloads Percent
INBOUND
Interstate----------------------------------------------------------------------- 3,627 81 1
Intrastate----------------------------------------------------------------------- 846 18.9
L. C. L. Percent
Interstate----------------------------------------------------------------------- 114 60 4
Intrastate----------------------------------------------------------------------- 75 39 6
Carloads Percent
OUTBOUND
Interstate ----------------------------------------- ----- --- 1 341 67 3- --- ----
Intrastate ----------------------------------------------------------'°----------
,
651 32 7
L. C. L Percent
Interstate-----------------------------------------------------------------------I 222 I 72 3
Intrastate---------------------------------------------------------------------- 85 27.7
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 507
of 1934, an investment of $4,705,976,350. To support its activity
33,000 men mine ore, 44,000 men mine coal, 4,000 men quarry lime-
stone, 16,000 men manufacture coke, 343,000 men manufacture steel,
and 83,000 men transport its product. The conception of the indus-
try as a conduit through which materials pass in a continuous stream
from mine to consumer, undergoing transformations en route, at the
mine, at the mill, at the fabricating plant, until they are delivered
to the consumer becomes, for technical and economic reasons, more
and more exact.
The steel industry involves enormous movements of materials back
and forth across the length and breadth of the nation. Of approxi-
mately 25,000,000 tons of ore mined in the United States in 1934,
15,000,000 were mined in Minnesota, 5,000,000 in Michigan, and
2,000,000 in Alabama. These states, on the other hand, accounted
for less than 2,000,000 of the 15,686,442 tons of pig-iron manufactured
in that year. In Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana, pro-
ducing 11,285,014 tons of pig iron, only 524,657 tons of ore were
mined. Additional iron ore is imported from Cuba and Chile.
States producing 9,429,305 tons of pig iron, 55.7% of the total, import
all the coal used by them in the manufacture of coke. Of the approx-
imately 114,000 tons of manganese used in the industry, 95,000 tons
are imported from Brazil, India, and Russia; the remainder is mined
in states of the United States producing little or no pig iron or steel.
A great steel company will, for example, dig out and pick up its
materials in one state, carry them to its plant in another, there
melt them down and fashion them into shapes, transport, them out
of its plant, itself initiating the rail shipment-sometimes perform-
ing all of a water shipment-, further fabricate them at the conclu-
sion of' this shipment in still another state, and then deliver them
to the customer. This vertical integration of the entire process
through the medium of a single company is typical of the few giant
corporations which control the bulk of the steel production in this
country. Two corporations, the United States Steel Corporation
and the Bethlehem Steel Corporation, have over 50% of the steel
capacity of the country. Add to this eight more companies, among
them the respondent, and 91% of the nation's capacity is accounted
for. This great size is in part an outgrowth of technical forces. It
has been estimated that the investment requirad for the most efficient
blast furnace operation is in the neighborhood of $100,000,000. Ver-
tical integration, a further source of economy, may increase capital
requirements. The great capacities thus built up, whatever their
causes, require large markets and have molded the steel industry as
a whole and in its most important units into a nationwide system.
The device of the "transit rate" for steel products-"transit rates"
on numerous products are permitted by the Interstate Commerce
508 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Commission-which is used by the respondent illustrates in particu-
lar that processing,' and fabrication are simply transformations of
materials en route in the stream of commerce. Under the transit'
rate a steel fabricator who buys steel forms from a steel producer at
point A, performs on them certain limited work at point B and then
ships the product to point C, receives from the railroads the priv-
ilege of the through rate from A to-.C (point B being considered
only as a temporary stopping place where service is performed in
transit). The respondent has availed itself of the transit rate to
fabricate steel thus in transit for delivery in states other than Penn-
sylvania. The great importance of transportation to the steel in-
dustry and of the steel industry to the railroads is shown by the
fact that 12% of the railroads' freight is attributable to the activity
of the steel industry.
An increasingly large part of this activity does not consist in proc-
essing goods in the expectation of future sales but is a direct response
to the customer's order. The steel industry is becoming predomi-
nantly a special order business. It has been estimated that the
industry must be prepared to produce no less than 100,000 variations
of the approximately 500 different kinds of steel products. Though
no one plant will meet all these needs, it will seek-particularly
where it is large-to fill all the demands possible for a plant of
its type; it will be ready to provide variations on its staple products.
But to carry sufficient inventories of such varieties becomes an in-
creasing burden. Thus, the consumer's order directly initiates par-
ticular plant activity and conversely, a breakdown in this activity
makes likely stoppage of shipment. This is true of the Aliquippa
Works, where most of the product is manufactured on special order.
The significance of the special order system, and the ramifying
effect of stoppage, are made clearer by an inquiry into the uses of
basic steel products. Steel, of course, is used to a great extent in
operations involving further manufacture and transportation. Re-
cent estimates show that about 20% of all steel products are used
by the automobile industry. The railroads take nearly 12% of the
steel output. Other important uses are food packing-9% ; agri-
cultural implements-517o; building and fabrication of materials for
building-12%. Furthermore, a large pig-iron and ingot plant such
as Aliquippa will produce semi-finished products to the order of spe-
cial steel fabricators. About 30% of Aliquippa's sales are of semi-
finished materials. A stoppage of steel 'production hinders the
progress of and normal operations, in these many industries which
depend on steel.
The price system of the steel industry emphasizes the close rela-
tion between shipment and manufacture of the product. We refer
to the famous basing point system of quoting prices. "The essence
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 509
of the multiple basing point system in the steel industry," says the
Federal Trade Commissions of the price system now in use, "is to be
found in its use of a device of calculation whereby buyers of a com-
modity located at any given point are charged by the industry a
definite uniform price for delivery at that point, regardless of the
point of shipment. . . ." This system enlarges the market in which
many companies can compete, since it neutralizes transportation dif-
ferentials based on differing distances between the plants of com-
petitors and a given customer. It no doubt assists many of the com-
panies in maintaining their great size, their broad structures of dis-
tribution, and their high degree of integration. It reveals fully the
fact that transportation of the product is not only the final stage of
that integration, but one which conditions the extent and nature of
the earlier stages. The mining of materials, their transportation to
and collection at a point, their transformation there into pig-iron,
into steel shapes in all stages of finish, their reshipment for further
fabrication, for use in railways, automobiles, buildings: all this is
one giant, indivisible economic process : it is commerce among the
states.
We conclude that the operations of the respondent constitute a
continuous flow of trade, traffic, and commerce among the several
states.
II. ORGANIZATION OF THE UNION IN ALIQUIPPA
Aliquippa is a city of about 30,000 inhabitants, 10,000 of whom are
employed by the respondent. Thus, one in every three is dependent
upon the respondent for employment. Assuming that an average
proportion of persons have families this means that nearly every one
looks to the respondent for his livelihood. The respondent owns in
Aliquippa a street railway system, a motor coach system, and the
water supply system. 'It owns 128 acres of improved and unim-
proved property, approximately 1,174 acres of farm land, and 674
dwellings occupied by employees all located in and about Aliquippa.
The respondent has its own police force-the "J & L Police."
On August 4, 1934, the Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel
and Tin Workers chartered the Beaver Valley Lodge, a labor organ-
ization, with the following officers and charter members: Harry V.
Phillips, president; Angelo Volpe, vice president; B. S. McDonald,
recording secretary; Martin Gerstner, financial secretary; James A.
Dunn, treasurer ; Andrew Smith, guide; Allen James, inside guard;
E. L. Ponder, outside guard.
The union sought, thereafter, to organize the men in the Aliquippa
Works. Their efforts were countered by systematic terror. Officers
8 Report of Federal Trade Commission to the President with Respect to the Basing
Point System, p. 2., November 1934.
510 . NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
of the union and organizers who came into Aliquippa were followed
about by the private police of the respondent-the "J & L Police".
The more important union officers were honored by the respondent
with permanent shadows and were followed even into the neighbor-
ing town of Ambridge where they carried on their activities because
of the difficult situation in Aliquippa. The house of Gerstner, the
financial secretary, at which an organization meeting had been held,
was surrounded day and night by the J & L Police, and the em-
ployment agent of the respondent sat near Gerstner's doorway noting
down the names of those who entered the house. Persons coming out
of the house were questioned. Some were mysteriously beaten and
hit on the head while walking in the streets. A year earlier in
August, 1933, a union organizer, John S. Moyer, had come to Ali-
quippa and distributed union pamphlets. As he went along the street
he was set upon by two persons who beat him severely. He was
then taken before a Justice of Police, fined $5, and refused a tran-
script of record for purposes of appeal. Until he left town he was
trailed by automobiles owned by the respondent.
The officers and organizers found it impossible, in August and
September of 1934, to secure a public place in Aliquippa for a union
meeting. They were refused the Italian Hall, the Slovak Hall, the
Serbian Hall; they were refused the use of open lots. They held
their meetings in an open lot in Ambridge, a town across the river
from Aliquippa. In October, union officers complained of the
Aliquippa situation to the Governor of the State. State police were
sent to Aliquippa. On October 14, 1934 the first open meeting of
the union was held in Aliquippa. It was addressed by Mrs. Pinchot,
the wife of the Governor of the State.
In June, 1933 the respondent installed at Aliquippa a so-called
"Plan of Employees' Representation". The plan provides for the
number and qualification of representatives under the plan. Under
the original plan a representative must have been in the employ of
the respondent for a period of at least one year immediately prior
to the day of his nomination. As amended in May 18, 1935 the
requirement that the representative be an employee was suspended
during the period that the National Industrial Recovery Act
(NIRA) was in force. The plan provides for the election of officers,
for meetings, and for settlement of grievances.
The question of adopting this plan was not, apparently, ever put
to a vote of the employees. They were invited simply to elect em-
ployee representatives. In the elections in June, 1935 (after the
NIRA had been declared unconstitutional) many employees-prac-
tically all concerned in this complaint-were urged two and three
times by the respondent's foremen and supervisors to vote in the
election, which was being held on the respondent's premises.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS
III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES
511
1. Martin Gerstner . Gerstner was employed by the respondent in
1930 and worked regularly until his discharge on December 14, 1,935.
He had worked previously for 15 years with the American Rolling
Mill Company. He was first employed by the respondent as a wire
man. He was transferred to the blooming mill, where , as a motor
inspector , he was working at the time of his discharge . Gerstner was
one of the charter members of the union; was financial secretary; and
was extremely active in organization . The first meeting of the union
in Aliquippa was held outside of his house . His house was watched
by J & L Police ; he was followed by them. In the summer of 1935
he was given less work than the other motor inspectors on the job,
though some were junior to him in employment . The reason given
for his discharge was that a nut had fallen off a crane which it had
been his duty to inspect . Shortly before that a certain crane operator
had operated a crane while intoxicated ; another operated a crane
without the required safety lock. Neither was disciplined . A third
man who had mishandled a crane had been given one week off.
2. Harry V. Phillips. Phillips was a motor inspector in the soak-
ing pits until his discharge on July 20 , 1935. He was a charter mem-
ber of the union and its first president . The day after he, with some
others, applied for the union charter he was approached by the J & L
Police and offered a job on the police force, at an increased wage. At
the same time , he was questioned . as to his visits to Ambridge. While
distributing union literature and selling the union newspaper in the
streets, he was questioned as to this activity ' by the J & L Police.
Shortly after , on his way to work ( at night ) he was followed by a
J & L Police car. He lost sight of the car . Passing an alley, he was
stopped and was struck . He asked for police protection at the station.
He was told , "Get the hell out of here. You don't deserve protec-
tion." In June, 1935, he spoke at three large meetings urging em-
ployees not to vote at the forthcoming employee representation
election . He asked permission to attend a picnic of the Democratic
Social Club . This was refused . His foreman told him , "If you want
off for that picnic , you will have time to go to a lot of picnics in the
future." The reason given for his discharge was a failure to answer
certain whistles calling him to the scene of a breakdown. He had
failed to answer two whistles. He had been working hard and had
gone to the wash room . Because of this he had not heard the first
whistle; the second he heard, but he saw a millwright go to answer it.
His foreman reprimanded him, "You fellows coming out at night
always want the millwrights to do all the work around here. You
can get to hell out of here . You are going to have plenty of time to
sell papers from now on ." Shortly after Phillips ' discharge , Gerst-
512 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ner noted and called to the management's attention the failure of
another inspector to answer a whistle. No action was taken against
this inspector.
3.° Angela Volpe. Volpe was first employed by the respondent in
1914 as a laborer in the cold roll department. He was promoted in
1916 to the job of greaser at the rolls; two years later to the job of
rougher. He quit in 1918 and returned in 1919. From 1919 to 1921
he was weigh master. From 1921 to 1930 he was foreman in the cold
roll department. He was returned to common labor in 1930, because
of his refusal to work on Easter Sunday. Shortly after he secured
a job as crane operator and worked at that until his discharge on
July 31, 1935. Volpe was a charter member of the union and its first
vice-president. He distributed and sold union literature on the
streets. He testified at the hearing held in 1934 by the National Steel
Labor Board on complaint against the respondent. Shortly after he
began to receive less regular employment. He was followed in the
streets by J & L Police. He was told by them not to join the union.
He was called into the office and told by the supervisor of his depart-
ment, "At J & L we don't want no union in this town. This is a
company town." He was told that the American Federation of Labor
could do the workers no good and was crooked. On June 12, 1935, his
foreman three times requested him to vote at the Employee's Repre-
sentation election and threatened him with loss of his job if he did
not. The foreman later apologized for this pressure. He said, "An-
gelo, if you want to make an affidavit outside go ahead, but I was
forced to do it."
During all his 21 years with the respondent, Volpe was never,
until April 29, 1935, criticized or laid off for cause. At this time
he was laid off for 15 days, because he operated his crane on a head
signal from his helper rather than on the formally required hand
signal. The head signal, though not absolutely proper, is not un-
usual, the helper often having his arms engaged by his work. When'
he was discharged he was told that he had hit a man in the stomach
with his crane. He was not asked if this were true ; he was given
no chance to defend himself. Volpe knows of nothing of this sort
that happened on that day in connection with the operation of the
crane. Shortly after his discharge, a craneman, John Pizak, spilled
a load and endangered many lives. No action was taken against
him.
4. Angelo Razzano. Razzano had been employed by the respond-
ent as a tractor driver from 1928 until his discharge on January 13,
1936. He has been an active union member since the organization of
the union. He signed 1,500 persons to membership; he has sold
and distributed union literature in public places. He was called to
the office of one of the plant superintendents and asked why he had
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 513
attended an organization meeting at Ambridge. The company, he
was told, would not "stand for" the union. He was told that the
union was corrupt, and "no damned good." The foreman told Raz-
zano that he had special orders to keep Razzano busy and when asked
why this was, the foreman said, "Do you know you are on the spot?"
Razzano was discharged because it was claimed that while operating
his tractor, he failed to close a door separating a part of the plant
from a yard. To forget to close this door was a common occurrence.
All tractor drivers have been guilty of it. Razzano had been told
by the tractor foreman he was the best tractor driver that he had.
One of the foremen later admitted to one of Razzano's fellow work-
ers that Razzano's discharge was "more for his union activity, but
that is what the slip called for, an open door."
5. Royal Boyer. Boyer, a Negro, was first employed' by the re-
spondent in 1924 as a common laborer. He was transferred to the
nail department as a machine operator in 1932 and worked on the
nail machine until his discharge on December 9, 1935. Boyer was
an active union member from the beginning. He was a leader among
the Negroes of whom there were about 800 in the plant. He signed
about 250 to membership. He distributed union literature. He
served on committees. One of the nail inspectors warned Boyer to
pay more attention to work and leave the union alone and not attend
the meetings. The same inspector told this to Boyer's wife. The
first suspension Boyer had ever had as a nail cutter was in October,
1935; this was either because he was charged with making bad nails
or had mixed good with bad. His final discharge was laid to his
supposed making of bad nails. The container-"buggy"-into which
he threw his finished nails was shared by another operator. Bad
nails were found in the buggy. Four days later he was discharged.
The other operator had often been charged with the production of
bad nails. No action was taken against him.
6. Eli Bozich. Bozich was first employed by the respondent from
1921-1923. He was again employed in 1928 until his discharge on
January 16, 1936. Until June, 1935 he was a swinger earning 600
an hour. He was asked twice by his foreman to vote at the election
under the employee representation plan. Though he was not at
work on the day of the election, someone was sent to fetch him to
the plant to vote. He said he would not vote. Shortly after he was
placed at common labor at 470 per hour. Bozich was an active union
member from the beginning. He distributed union literature. He
was disciplined by the respondent in September, 1934 for quitting
work before time. He was disciplined again for not reporting to
work. At this time he had been working only part time and it had
been customary to call him when needed. He was discharged be-
514 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
cause he was found standing idle waiting to be instructed as to his
next job.
7. Martin Dunn. Dunn had been employed by the respondent for
15 years as a crane operator when he was discharged on July 9, 1935.
He has been a member of the union from the beginning. He has dis-
tributed and sold union literature. He is a half-brother of Harry
Phillips, the president of the union. In early July he was ques-
tioned closely by his foreman as to whether he was a union member
and as to whether the union's charter had not been revoked because
certain of its papers had been lost or stolen. Dunn denied his mem-
bership and purported to know nothing about union affairs. He was
then called into the office of an assistant superintendent and ques-
tioned again. He was told that "nothing but a bunch of cut-throats"
would belong to the union. Four days before he was discharged
Dunn left the key to his crane on a bench while he went up on it to
grease it. When a. craneman is away from his crane he must lock it
and take the key with him so that no one else can operate it. It was
not, however, unusual for a craneman to overlook or forget this duty.
His foreman immediately followed him up the 300 steps of the crane
to where he was working and pointed out the oversight. When dis-
charged he asked, "What for?" "Nothing personal," his foreman
replied.
8. George Maroll. Maroll was first employed by the respondent
in 1921 as a crane operator. From 1921-1925 he was a millwright;
from 1926 to his discharge on December 5, 1935 he was a machinist's
helper. He has been a member of the union from the beginning.
He has signed about 300 persons to membership. He has sold and
distributed union literature. His foreman told him that he had a
report of these activities; he asked Maroll as a personal favor not to
join the union nor to carry union literature. He was urged to vote
at the elections for employee representatives. Shortly before his
discharge he was assigned to operate a drill press, work for which
he had no training and for which he was not being paid. He pro-
tested. He was told that he must do the best he could. He spoiled
some work. A few days later he was discharged. His discharge slip
classified him as a "fitter," one who does highly skilled and highly
paid work which he had never done.
9. Domenic Brandy. Brandy was employed by the respondent in
1910. For 14 years preceding his discharge on November 28, 1935
he was a "jig man" or coal washer. He was an active union member.
He was a trustee of the union. A leader among the Italian workers,
he has signed 665 employees to union membership. He has sold and
distributed handbills and newspapers. He testified at the hearing
before the Steel Board and soon found himself being given less work.
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 515
The supervisors and foremen talked to him continuously of the union,
telling him how "rotten" it was, questioning him as to his union
activities. He was laid off August 5, 1935,-for a "bad sample", i. e.,
a sample of coal washed by him which was claimed to have been
badly washed. This was the first time in his 14 years in this work
that he had ever been so disciplined. He was discharged on Thurs-
day, November 28, for the same reason. He asked when the sample
had been taken. "Tuesday night," was the reply. "I guess that
sample ain't mine," said Brandy, "because Tuesday nobody takes any
sample." He was told to get out.
10. Ronald Cox. Cox had been employed 31/2 years when he was
discharged on January 7, 1936, the last 21/2 years as a hoisting crane
man. He has been a member of the union since its inception, has
solicited members, has sold and distributed literature. In 1934 he
was called into the office of the general manager and told that the
union was a racket; that he was just paying his money to a bunch
of big fat guys that sat back and smoked cigars; that if he persisted
in affiliating himself with the union, the company could not tolerate
his back rents, and would have to put him out of the house ; that the
local merchants would not extend any credit; that Jones & Laughlin
would close the plant down and throw the key in the river before
they would recognize an outside union. While he was being told
this, the general manager wrote something on a paper. "Cox," he
said, "any time you change your mind, come in and tell me, and I
will tear this up." Cox was given less time. His immediate fore-
man would not talk to him. He had received safety awards for his
work; he had never violated any of the rules for proper crane opera-
tion. He was placed on one of the cranes most difficult to operate.
When he was discharged, it was necessary to secure a man from
another department to operate it. On January 6, 1936 he came to
work and went over to his crane. His foreman was present watching
him. Cox mounted his crane and began to work the hooks to make
a lift. The foreman came over and signaled him down. "Did you
inspect the crane?" "Yes," replied Cox. "Did you try your limit
stops?" "No," replied Cox. "Go back," said the foreman, "and get
your check and go home." This foreman had once suggested to Cox
that he "try the limit stops" in a certain way. Cox considered this
not only unnecessary, but dangerous and pointed that out to the fore-
man, who had replied, "There is a whole lot in that." The foreman
was not a crane man. Cox in his operating procedure followed the
man who had instructed him. When Cox went for his check he
heard his foreman talking over the phone. The foreman said, "He
didn't try his limit stops. Is that enough?" Then he looked up and
saw Cox, and said, "I can't talk to you now."
516 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
It is clear that the respondent discharged these ten men because of
their union activity and for the purpose of discouraging member-
ship in the union. The initial attempts of the union to organize
in 1934 were met by violent terroristic action. The coming of the
State Police made such action more difficult. The advent of NIRA
gave a fillip to organization. But immediately after the invalidation
of NIRA the respondent began anew its campaign, this time in a
more subtle form. Great pressure was brought to bear on union
members to make them vote under the employee representation plan.
This was relatively unsuccessful. Foremen and supervisors of the
-respondent vilified the union, made the union leaders continuously
conscious of the respondent's active hostility.
Then in July, 1935, scarcely a month after the invalidation of
NIRA and just shortly after the employee representation elections,
the president of the union, his half-brother, and the vice president
were discharged. There followed a series of discharges, all of men
active and vigorous in pursuit of the union's aims. Three of them
were officers, others had special qualities as leaders of particular
groups-Brandy, the Italian; Boyer, the Negro. In nearly every
case the pattern is the same. The victim is an old employee-the
least length of service seems to have been six years, the longest 26
years. During his entire employment he has served to the apparent
satisfaction of the respondent. Then suddenly with seeming caprice
he is discharged for a routine fault or omission, to which, normally,
slight penalty or no penalty attaches. Some cases are clearer than
others. Razzano, for eight years a top-notch tractor driver, is dis-
charged for leaving open a door. Dunn, for 15 years a crane opera-
tor, is discharged for leaving a key on a bench. But the cases taken
together reinforce each other, reveal the plan, the persistent attack
from which each springs. We find that the respondent has discrim-
inated with respect to hire and tenure of employment against the
persons named in the complaint as amended, except Gulio Yacobucci
and Marko Lukich, as to whom there is no evidence, for the purpose
of discouraging membership in the union, and that by such acts, the
respondent has interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees
in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section T of the Act.
In the past, disputes relating to the organizational activities of
labor have seriously disrupted operations in the steel industry. There
was the great steel strike of 1919 in which it is said more than 360,000
employees went out on strike because the steel companies refused to
meet any union representatives whatsoever for the purposes of col-
lective bargaining. Judge Gary of the United States Steel Cor-
poration said at that time that it is "the policy of our corporation
not to deal with union labor leaders." Coming to more recent times,
DECISIONS AND ORDERS 517
in 1934, 9,844 men suffered a loss of 264,810 man-days of work with
consequent serious injury to industry and commerce. We find that
the aforesaid acts of the respondent tend to labor disputes burdening
and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact the Board makes
the following conclusions of law :
1. Beaver Valley Lodge No. 200, Amalgamated Association of
Iron, Steel & Tin Workers of North America, is a labor organization,
within the meaning of Section 2, subdivision (5) of the Act.
2. By its discharge of Domenic Brandy, Angelo Volpe, Harry V.
Phillips, Martin Dunn, George Maroll, Royal Boyer, Martin Gerst-
ner, Angelo Razzano, Eli Bozich, and Ronald B. Cox, and each of
them, for the reason that they and each of them joined and assisted
the union, the respondent did interfere with, restrain, and coerce, and
is interfering with, restraining, and coercing its employees in the ex-
ercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, and by all of
said acts and each of them did thereby engage in and is thereby
engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8,
subdivision (1) of the Act.
3. By its discharges of the persons aforesaid, as set forth in para-
graph 2 hereof, and each of them, the respondent did discriminate and
is discriminating in regard to the hire and tenure of employment of
said persons and each of them, and did thus discourage and is thus
discouraging membership in the union, and by all of said acts and
each of them did thereby engage in and is thereby engaging in unfair
labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8, subdivision (3) of
said Act.
4. The unfair labor practices in which the respondent has engaged
and is engaging are unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within
the meaning of Section 2, subdivisions (6) and (7) of said Act.
ORDER
On the basis of the findings and conclusions of law, and pursuant to
Section 10, subdivision (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, the
National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the respondent,
Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation :
1. Cease and desist from in any manner interfering with, restrain-
ing or coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights 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
518 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
or other mutual aid or protection, as guaranteed in Section 7 of the
National Labor Relations Act;
2. Cease and desist from discouraging membership in the union or
any other labor organization of its employees, by discrimination in
regard to hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of
employment;
3. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will
effectuate the policies of the Act :
(a) Offer to Domenic Brandy, Angelo Volpe, Harry V. Phillips,
Martin Dunn, George Maroll, Royal Boyer, Martin Gerstner, Angelo
Razzano, Eli Bozich, and Ronald B. Cox employment in the respec-
tive positions formerly held by them with all rights and privileges
previously enjoyed; and
(b) Make whole said Domenic Brandy, Angelo Volpe, Harry V.
Phillips, Martin Dunn, George Maroll, Royal Boyer, Martin Gerst-
ner, Angelo Razzano, Eli Bozich, and Ronald B. Cox for any losses
of pay they have suffered by reason of their discharge, by payment to
each of them, respectively, of a sum equal to that which each would
normally have earned as wages, at the rate set out in the appendix,
during the period from the date of his discharge to the date of offer
of employment as ordered hereunder, less amounts earned by each
during such period ;
(c) Post immediately notices to its employees in conspicuous places
in each shop and yard of the Aliquippa Works stating (1) that the
respondent will not discharge or in any manner discriminate against
members of, or those desiring to become members of, Beaver Valley
Lodge No. 200, Amalgamated Association of Iron, Steel & Tin
Workers of North America, or persons assisting said organization or
otherwise engaging in union activity, and (2) that such notices will
be posted for a period of at least thirty (30) consecutive days from
the date of posting.
And it is further ordered that the complaint be, and is hereby dis-
missed, without prejudice, with respect to Gulio Yacobucci and
Marko Lukich.
APPENDIX
Name Date of discharge
Rate of
weekly
pay (5-
day
week)
Domenic Brandy___________________________ November 28, 1935______________________________ $26 00,
Angelo Volpe------------------------------ July 31, 1935------------------------------------ 22 00,
Harry Phillips ------------------------------ July 20, 1935------------------------------------ 27 50
Martin Dunn------------------------------- July 9, 1935 -------------------------------------- 1516
George Marell______________________________ December 5, 1935________________________________ 24 00
Royal Boyer -------------------------------- December 9, 1935________________________________ 30.00
Martin Gerstner___________________________ December 16, 1935_______________________________ 27. 50
Angelo Razzano_____________________________ January 13, 1936_________________________________ 14.8G
Eli Bozlch ---------------------------------- January 13, 1936_________________________________ 15 00
Ronald Cox--------------------------------- January 6, 1936---------------------------------- 24 00
I Per day.