III. Statistical record of board activity. Number of cases received, closed, and pending, 1935- Table 3. Number of cases and number of workers involved in cases received by the National Labor Relations Board, 1935-41- Table 4. Number of cases and number of workers involved in cases received by the National Labor Relations Board, 1940- 41. By industries of employers involved... Table 5. Number of cases and number of workers involved in cases received by the National Labor Relations Board, 1940- Table 6. Types of unfair labor practices alleged in charges re- ceived by the National Labor Relations Board, 1937-41_ - Table 7. Number of cases and number of workers involved in cases received, closed, and pending, 1940-41. By stage and Table 8. Number of unfair labor practice cases and number of workers involved in unfair labor practice cases received, closed, and pending, 1940–41. By stage and method of clos- ing.. Table 9. Number of representation cases and number of work- ers involved in representation cases received, closed, and pending, 1940-41. By stage and method of closing- Table 10. Number of cases and number of workers involved in cases closed by the National Labor Relations Board, 1935- Table 11. Number of cases and number of workers involved in cases closed by the National Labor Relations Board, 1935–41. Table 12. Number of cases and number of workers involved in cases received, closed, and pending, 1940-41. By affiliation Table 13. Number of unfair labor practice cases and number of workers involved in unfair labor practice cases received, Table 14. Number of representation cases and number of workers involved in representation cases received, closed, and pending, 1940-41. By affiliation of petitioner. Table 19. Number of elections and pay-roll checks and number of votes cast for participating unions, 1940-41.. Table 20. Pay-roll checks, number of elections, and number of 38 Page IV. Principles established.. A. Interference, restraint, and coercion in the exercise of the 40 41 B. Encouragement or discouragement of membership in a labor C. Collective bargaining-- D. Domination and interference with the formation or adminis- E. Investigation and certification of representatives.. F. Adequate proof of majority representation___ G. The unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining- I. Miscellaneous_. 51 54 62 63 72 77 C. Proceedings for contempt of court decrees enforcing Board 101 D. Special litigation___ 103 VII. Fiscal statement.. 106 Appendix A. Regional offices-location, territory, and directing personnel.. 107 Appendix B. Cases heard during the fiscal year 1940–41. 111 I. Unfair labor practice cases_ II. Representation cases.. Appendix C. Cases decided during the fiscal year 1940-41. Appendix D. Summary of litigation for fiscal year 1941. III. Cases in which an adjudication of contempt for failure to comply with Court decrees enforcing Board orders was sought.... 111 115 126 126 129 131 142 144 I. Proceedings for the enforcement or review of Board orders... 144 155 155 SIXTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD CHAPTER I A SUMMARY The past fiscal year was one of unusual stresses and strains upon the Board. Not only were there significant changes in the volume and character of its case load, but since many of the cases involved disputes in defense industries, the entire organization has functioned under abnormal pressures. The number of new cases filed increased during the first half of the fiscal year 1941 by approximately 18 percent over the same period of the prior fiscal year. As production for the defense program got under way, new plants were opened and operations expanded, and organizational activities of the labor groups were broadened and intensified. The result was a 78 percent increase in cases filed in the last half of the fiscal year over the same period in 1940. The over-all increase for the entire fiscal year 1941 was 48 percent. This volume marked a decided change in the trend established in the past several years. The maximum number of new cases received. in any fiscal year in the Board's history was filed in 1938 when there .were more than 10,000. The number in 1939 dropped to 6,900; in 1940 to approximately 6,200; and in 1941 it rose to over 9,100. Of significance also is the change in character of cases filed. In 1936, the first partial fiscal year of the Board's operation, charges alleging unfair labor practices under section 8 of the act constituted 81 percent of all cases filed, and petitions for investigation and certification of representatives under section 9 of the act only 19 percent. The ratio of unfair labor practice cases to all cases has shown a decline since that time, the percentage in 1937 being 71; 1938, 65; 1939, 67; 1940, 64; and in 1941, 53 percent. The statistical tables in chapter III indicate that since February 1941, complaint cases filed in each month have constituted less than 50 percent of the total. Despite this reduction in proportion, unfair labor practice cases filed increased approximately 24 percent in the last fiscal year over the prior fiscal year. While employers generally respect the law, cases involving flagrant violations are still being filed; but it is true that even with the numerical increase in unfair labor practice cases the proportional drop in their receipt is significant of increased observance by employers of the rights of their employees to self-organization and collective bargaining. The fiscal year 1941 saw concluded satisfactorily by adjustment in all stages of proceedings unfair labor practice cases involving some of the largest industrial combinations in the country. Few of the charges on file today em- . body the fundamental and significant conflict between industrial policy and the rights guaranteed the workers that the large historical cases represented. But it should not be assumed that this type of case does not still represent an important and essential part of the Board's work, or that the adjudication of unfair labor practice charges by the Board is not necessary to effectuate the purposes of the Act. The Board is gratified to report that its past record for closing in the informal stages approximately 85 percent of all cases closed during the fiscal year has been maintained despite the great increase in the volume of work. The importance of maintaining this performance cannot be overemphasized. In the Final Report of the Attorney General's Committee on Administrative Procedure, it is pointed out that administrative agencies generally perform the bulk of their work in cases which never reach the formal stage. Said the committee, after giving examples: Examples could be multiplied from nearly every agency in the Federal Government. Enough have been given, however, to make clear that even where formal proceedings are fully available, informal procedures constitute the vast bulk of administrative adjudication and are truly the life-blood of the administrative process. No study of administrative procedure can be adequate if it fails to recognize this fact and focus attention upon improvement at these stages.1 There were 21.684 unfair labor practice cases closed by the Board or its agencies during the 6 years ended on June 30, 1941. Of these, 19,891, or 91.7 percent, were closed without formal action; i. e., the issuance of complaint and notice of hearing. In 1,793 cases, or 8.3 percent of all closed, complaints were issued, but in only 975 cases, or 4.5 percent of all closed, was closing effectuated by securing compliance with an intermediate report or decision of the Board or court. The data on representation cases also show an interesting emphasis on informal action, although proceedings under section 9 are investigatory and not adversary. There were 12,568 cases closed in the entire period of operations ended June 30, 1941, of which 9,692, or 77.1 percent, were closed before formal action was instituted; and 2,876, or 22.9 percent, after formal action. In about 80 percent of cases closed after formal action, decision was rendered by the Board. The number of cases disposed of without formal action in 1941 exceeded the record in any year save 1938. Of the 8,396 cases closed, 7,114, or 85 percent, were closed by amicable adjustment in the form of settlement agreements, etc., or by withdrawal or dismissal after investigation but before the institution of formal proceedings. The comparative figures for 1940 were 6,098, or 83 percent of a total of 7,354 closed. Of cases closed in 1941, formal action was instituted in 15.3 percent, as against 17.1 percent in 1940. A substantial increase in the number of ordered and consent elections and cross-checks conducted by the regional offices to determine the choice of representatives of the workers in the appropriate units for collective bargaining was apparent in 1941. There were 2,566 such elections and cross-checks, more than double the 1,192 in 1940. Of this number, 75 percent, or nearly 2,000, were conducted by arrangements made through the agreement of the parties in informal proceedings. The general acceptance of the practice of collective bargaining and recognition of the principles which the Board has established in formally resolving such questions have greatly facilitated these determinations. 1 Final Report of the Attorney General's Committee on Administrative Procedure, p. 35. In dealing with disputes in defense industries the Board has cooperated fully with other Government agencies. Problems involving the rights of employees to self-organization and to bargain collectively have cut across many disputes threatening or actually tying up defense production which have engaged the attention of the Conciliation Service of the Department of Labor, the Labor Division of the Office of Production Management, and the National Defense Mediation Board. Since these agencies operate to mediate disputes and not to adjudicate statutory rights, the existence of claims under the National Labor Relations Act has been recognized as calling for close collaboration with the Board in its handling of such disputes. Thus there are many cases where mediation of a dispute over working conditions must await an investigation by the National Labor Relations Board under section 9, or where the investigation to determine whether the union claiming to represent the workers really does so in the contemplation of the Act, must await adjudication of unfair labor practice charges. In cases where the statutory rights of the workers are involved, the mediation agencies cooperate with and assist the Board to arrive at prompt decisions or satisfactory settlements. Mediation of statutory rights has not been resorted to. The tension which has pervaded the field of labor relations during the last year has been apparent to the Board since the middle of the fiscal year. Over 50 percent of the cases on its docket involve defense industries. Practically all the representation cases handled either formally or informally represent issues which demand the most expeditious handling because of threatened stoppages in defense production. This is true also of a substantial number of the complaint cases where it has not been possible for any of the mediation or conciliation agencies of the Government or of the Board's field staff to secure an amicable and satisfactory adjustment despite the fact that such cases result in stoppages or prevent collective bargaining. To achieve the closest cooperation with the mediation and conciliation agencies of the Government, the Board has directed its Field Division in Washington and its field employees throughout the country to work with the mediation and conciliation agencies of the Government and with the War and Navy Departments in bringing to a prompt and appropriate conclusion cases which threaten the national defense and involve issues under the Act which prevent mediation until they are disposed of. Constant cooperation exists between these agencies and Board representatives both in Washington and in the field. The cooperation received from the other agencies of the Government has been most gratifying to the Board, which has endeavored to reciprocate by selectively disposing of emergency cases as against others which have been longer on the dockets but are not so pressing from the defense angle. During the fiscal year a substantial reorganization has been undertaken and some changes in procedures inaugurated. They were designed to perfect administration and to make possible a more complete delegation of administrative responsibility to staff members on the one hand, and to expedite disposition of cases requiring decision 2 See ch. II. |