Evening Star Newspaper, March 7, 1940, Page 4

THE. EVENING STAR, WASHINGTON, D. ¢, THURSDAY, MARCH 7, 1940 compels an employer to enter into an agreement with the representa- Committee Explains N. L. R. B. Amendments (Continued From First Page.) nated in the complaint. Under the recommended amendments, the complaint issued by the administra- tor will be filed with the new board angd that board will fix the time and place for a hearing thereon, which cannot be less than 15 days after the service of the complaint. It is hoped that this change will do away with the practice brought out in the hearing before the committee of fixing “phoney” hearing dates for use as a lever to force a settle- ment. The amendments recom- mended make it the duty of the administrator to prosecute the com- plaint before the board or before its trial examiner conducting the hear- ing. Board to Sit as Judge To Determine Facts. , ‘The board has no prosecuting function whatever, but is to sit merely as a judge to determine the facts from the opposing contentions of the administrator, with his wit- nesses, and the person complained against, with his witnesses. The ad- ministrator is required to be made & party to all proceedings before the board and to take such action therein as he deems necessary. Or- ders of the board are to be enforced in the courts, not upon application by the board as under the present law, but upon application of the ad- ministrator. Such application is required to be made when the board 80 requests, or may be made by the administrator on his own motion. Similarly, proceedings to review an order of the board are brought by the party aggrieved, as petitioner, against the administrator, as re- spondent, and the administrator, rather than the board, has the func- tion of bringing to the attention of the court the reasons why the order of the board should stand and be enforced. Thus, the board is not required to act as advocate in rela- tion to a matter which it has decided as judge. 8ince it has no prosecuting func- tions, the board is given no power to subpoena any witnesses, but is required, upon application by the administrator or any party to pro- ceedings before the board, whether before or during a hearing, forth- with to issue subpoenas to the ad- ministrator or such party, as the case may be, for the attendance of witnesses or production of evidence. ‘The issuance of a subpoena is to be done as a matter of course, but if a person is required by any subpoena to produce evidence under his con- trol, and he thinks that such evi- dence has no bearing on the inquiry in progress, or that the subpoena does not describe with sufficient particularity the evidence whose production is required, he may move the board to revoke the issuance of the subpoena, and the board is SMITH COMMITTEE SPLITS—“Harmoniously,” the Smith committee split, 3-2, following its long inquiry of the National Labor Relations Board. A series of amendments will be introduced in the House by the majority. Above: Chairman Howard Smith (seated) shakes hands with the two dissenting members, Representative Arthur Healey, Democrat, of Massachusetts (left) and Rep- resentative Abe Murdock, Democrat, of Utah (right). Two men on the left joined with Mr. Smith in majority report. They are Representative Harry Routzohn, Republican, of Ohio (left) and Rep- resentative Charles Halleck, Republican, of Indiana (right). —A. P. Photo. change is made in Section 8 (1) of the act to provide that nothing thergin is to be construed or inter- preted as prohibiting any expres- sions of opinion with respect to any matter which may be of interest to employes or to the general public, provided that such expressions of opinion are not accompanied by acts or threats of discrimination, intim- idation, or coercion. Rules of Evidence ‘Would Be Applied. Under the present law, the rules | of evidence prevailing in the courts | of law or equity are not controlling {in board hearings. This require- Bill of Rights. Hence, a clarifying ponderance of the evidence. An ap- pellate court accepts the findings of the trier of facts if those findings are supported by substantial evi- dence, because an appellate court is not in a position to weigh evidence, not having heard the testimony, demeanor, and not being expert in evaluating testimony in a highly specialized field. Because the court cannot weigh the evidence, however, does not mean that the trier of facts should make findings with an eye to court review rather than with an eye to determining where the truth lies on a preponderance of the evidence before it. Hence, the committee rec- ommends that the board be required | to make findings upon a preponder- seen the witnesses, observed their | of employes to organize and the re- fusal by employers to accept the procedure of collective bargaining leads to strikes, etc, has been changed in the amendments recom- mended to a simple statement that the failure to bargain collectively between employers and employes leads to strikes, etc. In the opin- jon of the committee the present language of the act constitutes an indictment of employers generally which is not justified by the facts. The second change made in the language of the findings and decla- ration of policy by the amendments recommended is the elimination of denial by employers of the right | tives of a majority of his employes in an appropriate bargaining*unit. The Supreme Court, in the Jones-Laugh- lin case (1937, 301 U. 8. 1, stated that there was nothing in the act to compel an agreement, and the committee proposes to write into the act in terms that cannot be misunderstood the rules thus.an- nounced by the Supreme Court. “Bargain collectively” is defined as including the requirement that em- ployer meet and confer with his em- ployes or their representatives, listen to their complaints, and make every reasonable effort to compose differ- ences, but is not to be construed as compelling either party to reach an agreement or to make counter pro- posals. This definition is in sub- stance the definition announced by the Supreme Court in the Virginian Railway case (1937), 300 U. S. 515. Statute of Limitations Applied to Payments. Under the amendments recom- mended, statutes of limitations are provided for in two instances. First, it is provided that no complaint can be issued which is based on a charge of any unfair labor practice which occurred more than six months prior to the time such charge was made to the administration. Second, it is provided that no order for the payment of back pay or other money shall order such payment with re- spect to a period longer than six months. Cases have been brought to th! attention of the committee whére the decision of the board has not been rendered until at least 18 months after the case was argued before the board, and in which the board has issued an order directing the payment of money during this entire period of time. It is hoped that this provision will act to speed up board decisions. Effect of Examiner’s Intermediate Report. An amendment recommended by the committee provides that in situ- ations where the case is heard be- fore a single member of the board or before a trial examiner, such member or examiner shall prepare and serve on the parties an inter- mediate report together with a rec- ommended order, and that unless ‘excepuuns are filed thereto within ‘20 days after service, or within such further period of time as the board may allow, such recommended order | will become the order of the board. { The board is given power at any | time prior to the filing in court for | a petition for review or enforcement |to modify any such order or any other order issued or made by it. | Under the amendments recom- | mended, the term “agriculfural |labor” is clarified by definltion. | Such ‘term is not defined in the | present law, and the board in the G. W. Reported in Line For Conference Berth By the Associated Press. RICHMOND, - March 7.—The News-Leader said today there was “the strongest possibility” George ‘Washington University would be- come the sixteenth member of the Southern Conference In 1941. ‘The Washington school was pro- posed for membership in the con- ference at the annual meeting at Roanoke in December. The school sponsoring the proposal was the University of Maryland. Visits of Max Farrington, G. W.'s athletic director, at the conference meeting and the basket ball tour- nament at Raleigh, N. C,, last week lent further emphasis, the paper said, to the report that the school would succeed the University, of Virginia, which withdrew in 1936 as a conference member. A stipulation in the conference constitution says new member nom- Inations must be tabled a year be- fore being acted on. Labor Board (Continued From First Page.) no complaint can be issued on a charge of any unfair labor practice that occurred more than six months prior to the time the charge was made to the administrator. Second, it put a six-month limit on the amount of back pay to be awarded under labor disputes. “Cases have been brought to the attention of the committee where the decision of the board has amot been rendered until at least 18 months after the case was argued before the board, and in which the board has issued an order directing the payment of money during this entire period of time,” the com- mittee statement on the amend- ments explained. The committee also defined how far an employer may go in “express- ing his opinion with respect to mat- ters which may be of interest to employes or the general public’—a contentious point—declaring such expressions should not be prohibited when they “are not accompanied by acts or threats of discrimination, intimidation or coercion.” The committee took a pot-shot at the economics division of the board, & unit of 30 persons headed by Divid Saposs which has been under fire, specifically ruling it out of the new organization. “The hearings before the com- mittee indicate that there is no | | Justification whatsoever for the ex- | | istence of this division, and there | will be less justification for its ex- | istence under the other amend- | ments which impose on the board | | the exercise of judicial functions | | only,” the committee said. | | _In line with the decision of the| Supreme Court in the Fansteel case | President Roosevelt yesterday after- noon, but no comment was forthcom- ing today at the White House on the meeting. Mr. Smith told report- ers yesterdny he had been invited to the White House, and it was re- ported today that Secretary of Labor Perkins had been instru- mental in arranging the meeting. ‘The present board is headed by J. Warren Madden, and has in its membership Edwin 8. Smith and Willlam N. Leiserson. The latter has been in sharp disagr ent with many board practices. . Smith’s term expires next year. He and Mr. Madden have been particular tar- gets in the committee proceedings. “Economic Death Sentence.” Representatives Healey and Mur- dock disclosed that while they did not agree to creation of a new, three-man board, they were agree- able to enlarging the present one to five members. They also expressed vigorous op- position to rephrasing the declara- tion of policy in the act and denial of reinstatement to a worker who wilfully destroyed property—a pro- posal they said was “a sentence to economic death.” “The only justification for such an unconscionable penalty against the employe would be the imposi- tion of an equal penalty against the employer who is resoonsible for vio- lence,” they said. “No such equiva- lent penalty is contained in the amendment.” Representatives Healey and Mur- dock said that separation of the board's functions between the three members and the proposed admin- istrator would seriously menace ad- ministrative processes which have developed over a 50-year period. To Aid Employer. Regarding the employer-employe | discussion amendment, Representa- tives Healey and Murdock said the proposal “obviously” was advanced to permit the use of the economic weight of the employer to interfere | with the free exercise of the right | of self-organization. “We have exerted every effort to | agree with the other three members of -purpose that we claim for oure selves,” the minority said. “But we believe that the proposed amendments, agreed upon by the majority of the committee, are in fact emasculatory and threaten the principles, purposes and objectives of the act. “We call attention to the fact that our disagreement with the majority of the committee resulted from a vote on the question of adoption of ,the amendments as a whole.” Labor Agrees fo Atfend Conference With Arnold Building trades unions of the American Federation of Labor are ready to meet Assistant Attorney General Thurman Arnold to discuss the anti-trust drive in the building industry. Accepting Mr. Arnold’s offer of & conference yesterday, John P. Coyne, head of the Building Trades Department, reiterated that the use of the monopoly laws against labor was “erroneous and unjust,” but said a committee would see the As- sistant Attorney General if, in his opinion, “a useful purpose might be served.” Mr. Coyne’s reply followed a two- day conference of building trades officials who, he said, “are convinced that the Department of Justice is, as a matter of actual fact, proceed- ing against trade union practices that have always been considered legitimate. “These representatives feel that the policies which you have adopted with respect to the application of the anti-trust laws to activities of organized labor are erroneous and unjust.” 1937 PLYMOUTH COUPE Immaculate. $295 rroop PONTIAC co. | of the committee to whom we accord the same good faith and sincerity Oldest Pontiac Dealer in D. C. 4221 Conn. Ave. Wood. 8400 No Foot Too Hard To Fit These famous shoes are noted for their fine quality, orthopedically designed to help growing feet in their | North Whittier Heights case has | Which outlawed sit-down strikes, the | required to revoke the issuance of | ment, and it has been construed as|ance of the evidence in the same | proper development. the subpoena if it agrees with him. ‘These changes in provisions re- lating to the subpoena power will do away with any prior restraint | upon the issuance of subpoenas | and at the same time adequately | protect persons from fishing expe- | ditions. Under the amendments | recommended _enforcement of a subpoena ageinst one who disre~ gards it is to be had in court upon application of the person to whom the subpoena was issued rather than upon application of the board as under the present law, Changes Made in Handling Representation Cases. Substantial changes are made by the amendments recommended in the power of the board in relation to determining units appropriate for the purpose of collective bar- gaining and certifying representa- | tives for collective bargaining. | Under the amendments, the board is precluded from acting in these cases on its own motion, and is permitted to act only upon applica- tion by an employer under specified circumstances, or upon application by & specified percentage of, or by | 8 representative representing a specified percentage of, employes. ‘When such an application is made, the board is required to hold a hear- ing, and if as a result of the hearing it determines that the statements in the applicatiog are true and that the question is one affecting com- merce, it is required by order first to determine the unit appropriate for collective bargaining. That unit can't be larger than the largest unit claimed as appropriate in an application filed by employes or representatives in the proceeding. After determining the unit ap- propriate for collective bargaining, the board is required to take a secret ballot of employes in that unit, and by order certify the repre- | sentative or representatives for col- |a requirement by the board's trial | examiners, has had the effect of making records unduly long, as weil as permitting the board to make findings based upon, and to draw der the most liberal rules would never be admissible in a court of law. | The character of controversies which the board decides 1s not such that the rules of evidenec must be re= laxed to any great extent in order that substantial justice may be done |or vigorous enforcement of the ach effected. Thus, the committee has recommended that the proceedings before the board, or before its trial examiners, shall, so far as prac- ticable, be conducted in accordance with the rules of evidence appiicable in the district courts of the Unifed States under the rules of civil pro- cedure adopted by the Supreme Court. Preponderance of Evidence To Decide Finding of Fact. is required to issue an order if upon opinion that the person complained against has engaged in an unfair board has confused its functions un- der this requirement with the func- tion of the court in relation to find- ings of fact by the board in a pro- ceeding for the enforcement or re- view of a board order, for there was testimony in the hearings to the effect that the board made its find- ings on substantial evidence rather than on a preponderance of the evidence. The trier of facts is always re- quired to make findings on a pre- inferences from, evidence which un- | Under the present law, the board | all the testimony taken it is of the | labor practice. The hearings before | the committee indicate that the | manner as every other trier of facts. | Effect of Board Findings On Court Review. Under the present law, the board’s | findings of fact are made conclusive on the courts if they are supported by substantial evidence. While it is | true that the Consolidated Edison to some extent the ct t of whiit | evidence was deemed tial, the nature of the controversies which the bgard is called upon to decide, Psuch a3 the determination of an em- ployer's true motive for discharge ing an employe, are such that the courts ought to be given more power than they now have under the pres- ent lJaw to review the board’s find- ings of fact. Thus, an additional standard is prescribed under which the court can overturn such findings. Under the amendments recommended, such findings are conclusive unless they | are clearly erroneous, or unless they are not supported by substantial evidence. Declaration of Policy On Collective Bargaining. Two minor changes have been made in the wording of th® findings | and declaration of policy in section | 1 of the National Labor Relations | Act. First, the statement -that the ANY WATCH Cuoanad 128 $2 An Werk Watch Crystals, 38¢ WADE'S 615 13k 8. N.W. CREDIT JEWELERS case (1939), 305 U. S. 107-broadened |, the statement that it is the policy of the United States to encourage the practice and procedure of col- lective bargaining. In the opinion of the committee Congress should do everything in its power to pro- tect the exercise by workers of that right, but should not require the board to encourage unionization where employes do not want it. Under the amendments recom- mended, the committee, by changes in-the definition of the word ‘em- JPloye,” proposes.to write into the act the rule announced by the Su- preme Court in the Fansteel case (1939), 308 U. 8. 240, with respect to the right of an employe who has engaged destruction or seizure of property to be reinstated by order of the board. If a preponderance of the testimony taken shows that an em- ploye has willfully engaged in these unlawful activities, the board is to have no power to order such em- plove reinstated. Questions have arisen under the present act as to whether the act Were $35 and $40. 2—38, 1—39, 3—10, 3—42. Longs, 4—38, 3—40, 1—44, in violence or unlawful | 36 RICHARD PRINCE SUITS Sizes: Rej 2. {held that emploves of farm co- | operatives are not agricultural labor. | | This decision of the board was |affirmed by the Circuit €ourt of Appeals, and hence an amendment is necessary to exclude from the | coverage of the act employes which | it was never the intention of Con- | gress to include in that coverage. | Hence the committee recommends | that “agricultural labor” have the same meaning as in 4he Social Security Act. This definition was mittee on Ways and Means, and has been passed upon and approved by both Houses of Congress. Under the amendments recom- mended the board will be effectively precluded from setting up an eco- nomics division. The hearings be- fore the committee indicate that there is no justification whatsoever for the existence of this division, and there will be less justification for its existence under the other amendments which impose on the ‘board the exercise of judicial func- tions only. 3255 Yer 53 .. e 2—35, 4—36, 3—37, 3—38, 1—40. Stouts, 1—39. carefully worked out by the Com- | committee proposed an amendment under which the board would have | no power to order reinstatement of | a striking employe “if a preponder- |ance of evidence” shows that the | 1slriimr “has engaged in violence or | { unlawful destruction or seizure of | Property.” | | It also recommended changes in ;the “declaration of policy” of the Wagner Act eliminating_the state- | | ment that “it s the policy of the | United Stat&s! to ~encourege the | practice and procedure of collective | bargaining.” Not to Enceurage Unionism. “In the opinion of the commit- tee,” it was explained, ‘“Congress should do everything in its power | to protect the exercise by workers of that right, but should not require the board to encourage unionization where the employes do not want it.” Employes of farm co-operatives were excluded from the act's appli- cation. Chairman Smith conferred with Showing Sectional View of Construc- tion of Shoe Our Children’s Shoes are made by J. Edwards Co., Philadelphia, Pa. FITTED BY GRADUATE SHOE FITTERS Complete Line of Children’s High Shoes BOYCE &LEWIS Custom-Fitting Shoes Other Shoes, $2.75 to $6.50 According to Size 439-441 Seventh Street Northwest Equipped to Fit the Feet of Every Man, Woman ond Child % This means, after next Saturday we won’t even reduce a collar button ’til July 5th FINAL REDUCTIONS IN THE SPECIAL SELLING OF MEN'S SUITS AR I e $29.75 & $3500 GROSNER SUITS FURTHER [atirars 3 75 REDUCED! double breasted models in - $2 and $250 FANCY blues, browns and greys. SHIRTS Reduced to_ $1 . 1 9 22 RICHARD PRINCE TOPCOATS Were 835 and 810 Sizes: Rerulars, 132 7. 2—i8, 1—39, ) 1—42." Longs, 1—37, 1—10, 1—42' 13 RICHARD PRINCE 0’COATS Were $35 and $40. Sizes: Rerulars, 1—32, 3—34, 1—S35, 2—38, 1—37, 5—38, 1—39. 7 FASHION PARK TOPCOATS Were 815 and $50. Sites: Regulars, 1—34, 1—35, 1—36, 137, 1—38. Longs, 1—37. 158, 22 Pairs TROUSERS and SLACKS Werse 33! lective bargaining that have been| chosen by a majority of the em-| ployes voting. This certification is | to be effective for one year. Thus during this period both employes and employer will be freed from controversies with respect to em- | ploye representatives. Now Power to Decide Between Two Unions. The power of the board to de- termine the unit appropriate for collective bargaining has one im- portant exception. In cases where | there is a dispute between two or| more labor organizetions, each of which in their applications in the proceeding claim to represent al majority of the employes in the 1_mn5 claimed by such labor organiza-| tion to be appropriated, as to the unit or units appropriate fol_' the | purposes of collective bargaining, the board is required to make a finding to that effect and is given no power in such cases to deter- mine the appropriate unit or units until such labor organizations have by written agreement settled such dispute, or to determine any unit to be appropriate which is not specified and claimed to be such in the agreement. Where a dispute as to the unit or units appropriate for collective bargaining exists, the employer is| protected by providing that it is| not an unfair labor practice for him | to refuse to bargain with either faction. Freedom of Speech And of the Press. Questions have arisen under the present law as to whether Section 8 (1) of the act, making it an unfair labor practice to interfere with, re- strain, or coerce employes in the exercise of their rights to self-or- ganization and collective bargaining, prohibits an employer from ex- pressing his opinion with respect to matters which may be of interest to employes or to the general public. Obviously, no law of Congress can interfere with the freedom of speech or of the press guaranteed in the $16.95 3—34, 3—35, Shorts, 1—35. Gwaltney's SMITHFIELD All are skillfully tailored of hard-finished worsteds and were outstanding val- ues even at their original $20.75 and $35 prices. $1.00 Neckwear, mostly light shade $1.50 and $2.00 Neckwea: $2.50 and $3.00 Neckwe = 3.0 and 85 Pancy Coliar-Atta R POy i g Pl $2.50 White Madras C. A. Shirts, 16, 15% and 16% only, $1.19 $2 Fancy Collar-Attached Shirts. Sises: 2—13%, 2—14%, bl i 0 T ¢ > s $2 Windsor Crepe Collar-Attached Bhirts. Sizes 414 1—14% ST SIRLOIN STEAKS ib. 43: FINEST “CALAVO” AVOCADOS - - - . Crisp, Fresh Texas Fresh Killed Roasting CHICKENS 15.3]: 2-25° “Free of Frost,” Florida SPINACH ORANGES 2 b 1]c 2.1.»:.35: 9! “Week-en?:.!h Hfiq:&r.)slnclals 2 NOILLY-PRAT VERMOUTH DUFF GORDON “No. 28" SHERRY____1.39 e PEDRO DOMECQ'S “La INA” SHERRY_{.59 s Free Delivery Anywhere in Northwest Washington MAGRUDER, Inc. 1138 Connecticut Avenue (Between M end L) §35, $40 & $45 KUPPENHEIMER & GROSNER SUITS 2 475 $ In this group you choose $45, $50 & $55 KUPPENHEIMER & from single and double GROSNER SUITS 2 75 $ $2 and $2.50 PAJA- MAS Reduced to... > ! $1.39 $2 Plain Shade Pajamas, Sizes: 3—B, 8—C, 2—D $3.50 and $5 Pancy Pajamas. 3—A. 8—B. 4—C B0c Lisle Undershirts. Sizes: 40, 44. 48 only $2.50 Bilk Tie and Handkerchlef Sets. Slightly soile 85¢ Pancy Handkerchiefs oen 355 000, 35, $1.95 to $3.50 MUF- FLERS Reduced to_._. 95¢ $9.95 Special Sale of $40 & $45 KUPPENHEIMER TOPCOATS > $14.95 to $17.95 ROBES Reduced to. $3.75 Lightweight Robes with Bag to match $10 and $12 Borsalino Hats. 3 Only, Sise 7 Only. $5.00 and $7.50 Felt Hats in all sizes_______ $5.00 Derbies. 2—8%. 5—7. 5—7%, 1—T7%. breasted Chestys, single and double breasted . drapes, chalk stripes, tick patterns and the more conventional models. Single and double breasted styles. Chalk stripes, plain shades, checks and plaids in the new 3-button Chesty and blade drape models. @0 Prs. Regular Black, Tan and Two-tone Shoes with leather or crepe soles. Values to $10.00 $3.85 Prs. White, Brown, Sand and Gray Sueds 30 es with:crepe soles. Wers 36,50 & 87.50 $9-35 13 :{305“0!& Leather Dress Pumps. Were ‘z.’s P R A A e s e mrm\;fi?fimtfl’ F STREET.as ELEVENTH