Evening star., 1937-04-13
TINE digest of the majority opin-
ion, upholding the Wagner la
bOr regulations act in the

TINE digest of the majority opin-
ion, upholding the Wagner la
Dor regulations act in the
u Jones g. Laughlin Steel Corp
case, as delivered by Chief Justice
Hughes, follows:
In proceeding unGer the national
labor relations act of 1885, the Ma
tional Labor Relations Board found
that the petitioner, Jones & Laughlin
Steel Corp, had violated the act by
engaging in unfair labor practices
affecting commerce. The proceeding
was instituted by the Beaver Valley
Lodge, No. 200 affiliated with the
Amalgamated Association of Iron,
Steel and Tin Workers of America, a
labor organization. The unfair labor
practices charged were that the cor
poration was discriminating against
members of the union with regard to
hire and tenure of employment, and
was coercing and intimidating its en-
ployes in order to interfere with their
self-organization. The discriminatory
and coercive action alleged was the
discharge of certain employees.
The National Labor Relations Board,
sustaining the charge, ordered the cor
poration to cease and desist from
such discrimination and coercion, to
offer reinstatement to 10 of the en-
ployes named, to make good their
losses in pay and to post for 80 days
notices that the corporation would
not discharge or discriminate against
members, or those desiring to become
members, of the labor union. AS the
corporation failed to comply, the board
petitioned the Circuit Court of Ap-
peals to enforce the order. The court
denied the petition, holding that the
order lay beyond the range of Federal
power. SO F.. cd, 998. We granted
certiorari.
Provides Rights of Workers
To Bargain Collectively.
The scheme of the national labor
relations act-which is too long to
be quoted in full-may be briefly
stated. The first section sets forth
findings with respect to the injury to
commerce resulting from the denial
by employers of the right of employees
to organize and from the refusal of
employers to accept the procedure of
collective bargaining. There follows
q declaration that it is the policy of
the United States to eliminate these
causes of obstruction to the free flow
OF commerce. The act then defines
the terms it uses, including the terms
commerce" and affecting commerce. -
Section 2. 1t creates the National La
Dor Relations Board and prescribes its
organization. Sections 3-6. 1t sets
forth the right of employees to self
organization and to bargain collec-
lively through representatives of their
own choosing. Section 7. 1t defines
unfair labor practices" Section 8. 1t
lays down rules as to the representa-
tion of employees for the purpose Of
collective bargaining Section 9. The
board is empowered to prevent the de-
scribed unfair labor practices affect
Ing commerce and the act prescribes
the procedure to that end The board
Is authorized to petition designated
courts to secure the enforcement of its
order. The findings of the board as
to the facts, if supported by evidence,
are to be conclusive.
If either party on application to the
court shows that additional evidence
is material and that there were rea-
sonable grounds for the failure to ad-
duce such evidence in the hearings
before the board, the court may order
the additional evidence to be taken.
Any person aggrieved by a final order
of the board may obtain review in
the designated courts with the same
procedure as in the case of an appli-
cation by the board for the enforce
mept of its order. Section 10. The
board has broad powers of investiga-
ton. Section II. Interference with
members of the board or its agents in
the performance Of their duties is pun
ishable by fine and Imprisonment. Sec
ton IL. Nothing in the act is to be
construed to interfere with the right
to strike. Section 49, There is sep
arability clause to the effect that if
any provision of the act or its appli-
cation to any person or circumstances
shall be held invalid, the remainder of
the act or its application to other per-
sons or circumstances shall not be af-
fected. Section IS. The particular
provisions which are involved in the
instant case will be considered more in
detail in the course of the discussion.
Board Charges Unfair
Labor Practices.
The procedure in the instant case
followed the statute The labor union
filed with the board its verified
charge. The board thereupon issued
its complaint against the respondent,
alleging that its action in discharg-
ing the employees in question consti-
tuted unfair labor practices affecting
commerce within the meaning Of Sec
ton 8, subdivisions Q) and 80, and
section 2, subdivisions 60 and CD
Of the act. Respondent, appearing
specially for the purpose of objecting
to the jurisdiction of the board, filed
Its answer. Respondent admitted the
charges, but alleged that they were
tion of rules or for other good rea-
sons and were not aScribable to union
membership or activities AS an
affirmative defense respondent chal-
lenged the constitutional validity of
the statute and its applicability in
the instant case Notice of hearing
was given and respondent appeared
by counsel. The board first took up
the issue of jurisdiction and evidence
was presented by both the board and
the respondent. Respondent then
moved to dismiss the complaint for
lack of jurisdiction and, on denial
OF that motion, respondent in ac-
cordance with its special appearance
withdrew from further participation
In the hearing. The board received
evidence upon the merits and at It's
close made its findings and order.
Contesting the ruling of the board,
the respondent argues Cd that the act