Opinion ID: 405327
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: The Seriousness of the Unfair Labor Practices

Text: 39 The Board also concluded that the unfair labor practices committed by the Company were sufficiently serious and pervasive in character to preclude the holding of a fair election and to warrant the issuance of a bargaining order. John Cuneo, Inc., 253 N.L.R.B. at 1027; see also id. at 1036 (A.L.J. Decision). The Company contests the Board's conclusion. 40 We have no difficulty deciding that the Company's unfair labor practices in this case had the tendency to undermine majority strength and impede the electoral process. Court and Board cases often have viewed unfair labor practices similar to the ones in this case-interrogation, threatened discharge, surveillance, discriminatory application of work rules-as conduct which supports the issuance of a bargaining order. See, e.g., Comment, A Reappraisal of the Bargaining Order: Toward a Consistent Application of NLRB v. Gissel Packing Co., 69 Nw.U.L.Rev. 556, 565-78 (1974); Note, The Gissel Bargaining Order, the NLRB, and the Courts of Appeals: Should the Supreme Court Take a Second Look?, 32 S.C.L.Rev. 399, 411-14 (1980). In addition, the Company's delayed reinstatement of the striking employees was a particularly serious unfair labor practice. As the Board noted, two strikers were, in essence, discharged since they were never offered their jobs back. John Cuneo, Inc., 253 N.L.R.B. at 1027. Four other strikers were constructively suspended since they were not offered reemployment until months after (the Company) had begun filling vacancies that occurred following their request to return to work. Id. These constructive discharges and suspensions, especially when coupled with the other unfair labor practices committed by the employer, plainly satisfy the second prerequisite to a Gissel bargaining order. 16 41