Opinion

Jerry Davidson Buick Sales & Service, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board

  • 415 F.2d 324
  • 71 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3040
  • 1969 U.S. App. LEXIS 11456
Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Filed
Jul 17, 1969
Status
Published
On the bench
O'Sullivan, Edwards, Combs
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 52.6%

The opinion

ORDER

The National Labor Relations Board adopted the Examiner’s findings that Jerry Davidson Buick Sales & Service, Inc., violated Section 8(a) (1) of the National Labor Relations Act by interrogating employees, and violated Sections 8(a) (3) and (1) of the Act by discrimi-natorily discharging an employee. The Board’s decision and order are reported at 172 N.L.R.B. No. 203. The company petitions for review of the order and the Board requests enforcement.

The only question presented is whether the Board’s findings are supported by substantial evidence. Although the company maintains that the employee’s faulty repair of a customer’s automobile prompted the discharge, it is clear that the discharged employee was a known union adherent who had arranged the first union organizational meeting, which was held the day following his discharge, and who also had discussed the union with the shop foreman on the morning of his discharge. The quality of his work had not been previously questioned and no attempt was made by the company to verify the employee’s contention that he was not guilty of shoddy work.

At a group meeting of employees called by the company immediately after the discharge, a company spokesman stated that a union could provide no new benefits. He solicited employee grievances, and promised to remedy those complaints. For example, one employee testified that the company official stated that, if the union movement was due to job insecurity, the company “would find some method to secure it.” A similar meeting was held two days later. The

*325

first union organizational meeting was held in the interim between the two company-convened meetings.

Upon examination of the record as a whole as summarized in the factual situation outlined above, we are of the opinion that there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s findings that the discharge was discriminatory and that employees were interrogated in violation of the Act. Accordingly, the Board’s order will be enforced.

Entered by order of the Court.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.