Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

SCHAUFFLER EX REL. NLRB v. HIGHWAY TRUCK DRIVERS &

August 10, 1959

Bennet F. SCHAUFFLER, Regional Director of the Fourth Region of the National Labor Relations Board, for and on behalf of the National Labor Relations Board, Petitioner,
v.
HIGHWAY TRUCK DRIVERS & HELPERS, LOCAL 107, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, and Warehouse Employees Union Local 169, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, Respondents



The opinion of the court was delivered by: DUSEN

I. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law

This cause came on to be heard upon the verified petition and amended petition of Bennet F. Schauffler, Regional Director of the Fourth Region of the National Labor Relations Board (herein called the Board), for a temporary injunction, pursuant to § 10(l) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended 29 U.S.C.A. § 160(l) (herein called the Act), pending the final disposition of the matters involved pending before the Board, and upon the issuance of an order to show cause why injunctive relief should not be granted as prayed in said petition. Respondents filed an answer to said petition. Hearings on the issues raised by the petitions and answer were duly held on July 31 and August 4, 1959. All parties were afforded full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, to present evidence bearing on the issues, and to argue on the evidence and the law. The court has fully considered the petitions, answer, evidence, arguments, and briefs of counsel. Upon the entire record, the court makes the following:

 A. Findings of Fact

 1. Petitioner is Regional Director of the Fourth Region of the Board, an agency of the United States, and filed this petition for and on behalf of the Board.

 2. Respondents Highway Truck Drivers & Helpers, Local 107, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, and Warehouse Employees Union Local 169, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America (herein respectively called Local 107 and Local 169), unincorporated associations, are labor organizations within the meaning of §§ 2(5), 8(b) and 10(l) of the Act, 29 U.S.C.A. §§ 152(5), 158(b), 160(l) and at all times material herein have been engaged within this judicial district in transacting business and in promoting and protecting the interests of their employee members and members of affiliated labor organizations.

 3. On or about April 13 and June 24, 1959, Food Producers Council, Inc. (herein called Council), pursuant to the provisions of the Act, filed charges with the Board alleging, inter alia, that respondents have engaged in, and are engaging in, unfair labor practices within the meaning of § 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act

 4. Said charges were referred to petitioner as Regional Director of the Fourth Region of the Board for investigation, and were investigated by petitioner and under his supervision.

 5. There is, and petitioner has, reasonable cause to believe that:

 (a) Council is a federation of approximately 100 affiliated organizations which are composed of firms and individuals engaged, among other things, in the production, packing, marketing and transportation of raw and processed agricultural commodities. Council, through its affiliated organizations, acts for and on behalf of members in promoting economy and efficiency in the marketing and distribution of food products. The value of the products marketed by members of Council's affiliates shipped in interstate commerce exceeds one million dollars annually.

 (b) Charles W. Karper, Daniels & Griffin, Joy W. Roe, Rockingham Poultry Corp., and others (herein collectively called truckers), are common or contract carriers engaged in the transportation and delivery of freight in interstate commerce, some or all of whom each annually hauls freight across state lines valued in excess of $ 50,000.

 (c) The Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Company (herein called A & P) and American Stores Company (herein called American) operate multistate chains of retail stores and are engaged in commerce within the meaning of that word as used in the Labor Management Relations Act. The annual gross sales of each of said companies amount to more than $ 500,000.

 (d) At all times material herein, truckers have assigned the work of unloading their trucks at places of delivery, including unloading at the A & P Warehouse at Yeadon, Pennsylvania, and at American's warehouse at 31st and Master Streets, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to their own employees who are not members of or represented by respondents.

 (e) Since prior to January 24, 1959, respondents have induced and encouraged the truckers to assign the unloading work referred to in Finding of Fact 5(d) above to employees who are members of or represented by respondent Local 107, rather than to employees who are not members of or represented by respondent Local 107.

 (f) In support of the inducement and encouragement referred to in Finding of Fact 5(e) above, respondents, since of or about and prior to January 24, 1959, have directed and requested the drivers employed by truckers not to unload, and have refused to permit said drivers to unload, at the A & P and American warehouses.

 (g) In further support of the inducement and encouragement referred to in Finding of Fact 5(e) above, respondent Local 169, since on or about January 24, 1959, has instructed, requested and appealed to employees of A & P and American to refuse to receive or handle any products unloaded by said truckers or their drivers.

 (h) By their acts and conduct referred to in Finding of Fact 5(f) and (g) above, and by other means, respondents have engaged in, and have induced and encouraged employees of said truckers, A & P, American, and of other employers, to engage in concerted refusals in the course of their employment to use manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or work on goods, articles, materials, or commodities or to perform services.

 (i) An object of respondents' acts and conduct set forth in Finding of Fact 5(f), (g) and (h) above was and is to force or require truckers to assign the work of unloading their trucks at the A & P and American warehouses, and at other terminals, to employees who are members of or represented by respondent Local 107 rather than to employees who are not members of or represented by respondent Local 107.

 (j) The acts and conduct of respondents set forth in Findings of Fact 5(f), (g), (h) and (i) above, occurring in connection with the operations of Council, truckers, A & P and American, have a close, intimate, and substantial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and tend to lead to and do lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce.

 6. It may be fairly anticipated that, unless enjoined, respondents will continue or repeat their acts and conduct hereinabove set forth, or similar or like acts and conduct.

 B. Conclusions of Law

 1. This court has jurisdiction of the parties and of the subject matter of this proceeding, and under § 10(l) of the Act is empowered to grant injunctive relief.

 2. Respondents are labor organizations within the meaning of §§ 2(5), 8(b), and 10(l) of the Act.

 3. There is, and petitioner has reasonable cause to believe, that:

 (a) Council, truckers, A & P and American are engaged in commerce within the meaning of §§ 2(6) and (7) of the Act.

 (b) Respondents have engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of § 8(b)(4)(D) of the Act, and affecting commerce within the meaning of § 2, subsections (6) and (7) of the Act, and a continuation of these practices will impair the policies of the Act as set forth in § 1(b) thereof.

 4. To preserve the issues for the determination of the Board as provided in the Act, it is appropriate, just and proper that, pending the final disposition of the matters involved pending before the Board, respondents, their officers, representatives, agents, servants, employees, attorneys and all members and persons acting in concert or participation with them, be enjoined and restrained from the commission, continuation, or repitition of the acts and conduct set forth above in Findings of Fact 5(f), (g), (h) and (i), acts or conduct in furtherance or support thereof, or like or ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.