Evening star., 1945-09-03
Complex
On Veterans
Facing Courts
Super-Seniority' Only
One of About IS
Major Problems
BY MIRIAM OTTENBERG


So-called super seniority" is only
one OF about IS different problems
involving the employment rights
Of veterans which the courts NAV
be called on to decide, it was learned
today
The right of the veteran to be
rehlred and to hold his Job for a
year regardless of the greater senior
lty OF nonveterans was decided last
week in a Brooklyn Federal Court.
but an affected union already has
announced it's intention to seek a
Supreme Court ruling on the ques-
ton and similar case is now
pending in Michigan
Three Cases Already in Courts.
/ While thousands of re -emplovment
| problems, according to National Sc
lectlve Service, have been settled
amlcably by draft board re-emplov-
ment committeeman, three cases are
pending IN the Federal courts and
/ 28 others are on the desks of United
States Attorneys.
/ According to selective service
survey these cases now are awaiting
court action:
In the Michigan case-Droste VS.
NaSh-kelVlnator Corp "a veteran
was restored to his old job but was
laid off in accordance with a collec-
tive bargaining agreement and a
nonveteran was held on the lob do
ing similar work This follows the
pattern of the Brooklyn case, where
the court ruled the veteran should
stay on the job regardless of union
contract
Two other cases involve the oues-
ton Of union membership. Selective
service reported, however. that one
Of the cases probably would be set
tied out of court. The question OF
unemployment of nonunion vet
Grams in closed shops is being studied
by the Justice Department.
Others Listed in Action,
/ At the end of July these cases
were in the hands of United States
attorneys because Unemployment
committeeman and other selective
service officials had been unable TO
effect settlements:
-Four of them question whether
the veteran was an employe within
the meaning of the law when he
entered the armed forces. In these
cases independent contractors or
partners are involved
In three cases the employers have
contended the veterans were hold
ing temporary Jobs when they went
TO war and therefore are not en-
titled to return to their old Jobs.
In three cases veterans are asking
reimbursement of back pay caused
by a delay or refusal to reinstate
the veterans on their old Jobs.
In two cases employers contend
their circumstances have so changed
that 1t would be impossible or un-
reasonable to put the veteran back
to work.
Two cases question the veterans
ability to perform his old lob.
Two cases question whether tho
job 10 which the veteran was re-
stored lived up to the requirement
that the job be the same as his old
one or one OF like seniority, status
ana pay.
Availability Questioned.
In two cases, the question at issue
is whether the veteran now in the
Enlisted Reserve Corps has COM
pleted his military service.
In four cases. employers have fat
ly refused to reinState veterans.
without giving reasons.
Other cases question whether
veteran can replace a nonveteran
with greater seniority. whether the
law covers part-time jobs. the place
where the veteran is to be re-
employed, the eligibility of a veteran
for bonus given to all employees
while the veteran was in military
service, the veterans eligibility for
automatic promotions and the total
or his seniority privileges.
While some groups are in favor OF
letting the courts decide these issues,
demands have come from union,
management and veterans organ
lzatlons for Congress to rewrite and
clarity the employment pro-
visions Of the Selective Service Act.
So far half dozen cases have been
decided by the courts and all Of
them have followed the selectivs
service interpreta ton of the law.