Montana labor news., 1938-03-17
BY A. F. of L. News Service.

BY A. F. of l.. News Service.
The unanimous decisions of the
Supreme Court of the United States
in voiding company unions of bus
operators employed by the Pennsyl-
vania Greyhound Lines, Inc, and
the Greyhound Management Com
pany, in one case, and Pacific Grey
hound Lines, Inc, in the other case,
pulled another prop from under So
called labor organizations prompted
and controlled by employers.
Based ON Decision in Railway
Clerks Case
Competent observers pointed out
that the Supreme Courts decisions
reaffirmed the principles %enunciated
a number of years ago in the Rail
way Clerks versus Texas & New
Orleans Railway Company case, to
the effect that where a company
interferes with the REORGANIZATION
of its employees through the estab-
lishment and maintenance of a COM
pany-dominated union, the employ
er be legally directed to dis-estab-
fish such company union.
The present decisions, it was said,
are significant in that employers will
now know that they may not foster
company-dominated unions as a
method of interference with legiti-
mate unionization by employees.
Prohibited by Labor Act
The National Labor Relations Act
declares that it is illegal for an en-
ployer to dominate or interfere with
the formation or administration of
any labor organization or contribute
financial Or other support to it and
provides administrative authority to
require the dissolution of such en-
ployer-controlled unions"
Unfair Labor Practices Charged
Complaints were filed with the
National Labor Relations Board
charging the Greyhound companies
with promoting and supporting "un-
ions of their employees in violation
of the unfair labor practices sections
of the Labor Act. The Labor Board
found the complaints justified and
ordered the companies to withdraw
recognition of the unions and dis
establish them,
The third and ninth Federal Cir
cult Courts of Appeal held that the
Labor Board had exceeded its statu-
tory authority and refused to give
judicial sanction to the Boards
orders.
Collective Bargaining Obstructed
Reversing these rulings, the Su-
preme Court, in an opinion by As
~sociate Justice Harlan F. Stone, said:
Before enactment of National La
Dor. Relations Act this court recog-
nized that the maintenance of a
company union, dominated by the
employer, may be a ready and effec-
tive means of obstructing self-or-
ganization Of employees and their
choice of their own representatives
for the purpose of collective bar
gaining"
Turning to the Pennsylvania
Greyhound Lines, Inc, and Grey
hound Management Company, JUS
tice Stone said the findings show
that the respondents 'had engaged
in unfair labor practices by inter
fering with, restraining and coercing
employees in the exercise Of their
rights guaranteed by Section z (of
the National Labor Relations Act),
in that they had interfered with the
formation and administration of a
labor organization of their en-
ployees, Employees Association Of
Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines,
Inc, and had contributed financial
and other support to it." in violation
of the Labor Act.
Violations of the Labor Act were
also developed in the Investigation
of the practices of Pacific Grey
hound Lines, Inc.
Railway Labor Act Cited
The opinion then pointed out that
the experience in administering the
Railway Labor Act had shown COM
pany unions to be a stumbling block
to effective collective bargaining.
Congress, in enacting the Labor
Relations Act, had in mind the ex-
perience in the administration of
the Railway Labor Act" Justice
Stone continued, land declared that
the former was an application and
further Qualification of the principles
of the latter.
ITO secure to employees the bene-
fits of self-organization and collec-
tive bargaining through representa-
tives of the employees own choosing
the board was authorized to order
the abandonment of unfair labor
practices and to take affirmative ac-
ton which would carry out the poll
cy of that act"
Incapable of Collective Bargaining
Under these conditions the Su-
preme Court held that the authority
administering the Labor Act had the
statutory right to demand the aboli-
ton of the company unions, and
therefore reversed the decisions of
the two Circuit Courts of Appeal
which held that the Labor Act did
not give the administrative author