Document: 401 U.S. 137 91 S.Ct. 599 27 L.Ed.2d 735 MAGNESIUM CASTING CO.v.NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD. No. 370. Argued Jan. 18—19, 1971. Decided Feb. 23, Rehearing Denied April 19, See 402 925, 1364. Syllabus Following a unit determination hearing, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regional director concluded that three individuals were employees rather than supervisors and thus includible in proposed bargaining at petitioner company's plant. The NLRB denied petitioner's request for review. an election, certified union as exclusive representative. Subsequently, upheld finding refusal to bargain constituted unfair labor practice. Petitioner moved reconsideration on ground was required give plenary review director's representation before issuing practice order based determination. motion Court of Appeals enforced NLRB's order. Held: Under § 3(b) Act is permitted delegate its authority determine appropriate unit, by such not mandatory. Pp. 141—143. 427 F.2d 114, affirmed. Louis Chandler, Boston, Mass., petitioner. Norton J. Come, Washington, D.C., respondent. Mr. Justice DOUGLAS delivered opinion Court. 1 Section Act, amended, 61 Stat. 139, 73 542, 29 U.S.C. 153(b), authorizes directors power collective bargaining.1 accordingly adopted rules delegating powers issues defining conditions when will director.2 2 On filing petition, 9(c)(1) provides hearing shall be held if question exists and, so, unit. If election directed prevails, it employees' An employer who contests including determination, can only obtain court under 10 after charge has been made against him refusing collectively 'with representatives his provided 8(a)(5). 3 In review, however, need reviewed Board. Whether reviews initial decision merits, see Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. NLRB, 313 146, 162, 908, 85 L.Ed. 1251, or fails action director, denies discretion reopen issue where newly discovered noncumulative evidence available.3 4 United Steelworkers filed petition requesting among production maintenance Hyde Park, Massachusetts, essential tendered concerned four classified 'assistant foremen.' whether they properly within defined 2(11) therefore excluded. found ordered consisting all employees, three. 5 with men contending clearly erroneous. held. Thereafter representative employees. When refused bargain, trial examiner 175 N.L.R.B. 68. 6 claiming must it. Petitioner's reliance Pepsi-Cola Buffalo Bottling Cir., 409 676, decided Second Circuit. motion, noting disagreement case. 7 Board's order,4 creating conflict circuits which led us grant certiorari. 400 818, 55, 45. 8 argues necessary some point. Historically, once fully litigated proceeding could relitigated proceeding. We so pittsburgh supra. That case, course, itself. 1959, added. Senator Goldwater, member Conference Committee explained purpose:5 9 '(Section 3(b)) new provision, either House Senate bills, designed expedite final disposition cases Board, turning over part caseload 'Under this exercise no greater same statutory respect cases. handling cases, are follow lawful rules, regulations, procedures, precedents act respects itself would act. 11 'This designed, indicated, speed work * *' 12 take statement reflect considered judgment Congress have expertise concerning determinations. Or perhaps primarily motivated desire lighten workload up processes. Its recent report6 shows fiscal year 1969, total 1,999 formal decisions issued directing elections dismissing petitions; 1,872 these rendered directors, 127 (100 direct transfer from decision). 13 But 1959 amendment those 14 Whatever reason delegation, clear choice; fact discretionary creates possible infirmity range our imagination. 15 1961 rejected reorganization plan delegated decisionmaking hands examiners subject review7 bearing present problem. choices may make deciding what delegation do context raise any semblance substantial question. For unmistakably plain here did allow director. 16 rules8 respecting factfinding.9 accompanies case both Board10 Appeals.11 supported 'by evidence.'12 17 showing that. 18 Affirmed. Sec. relevant part: 'The also authorized section purpose bargaining, investigate provide hearings, exists, secret ballot subsection (c) (e) certify results thereof, except upon therefor interested person, paragraph, but not, unless specifically operate stay taken *.' contained CFR 102.67. Subsections 102.67(c), (d), (f) state '(c) compelling reasons exist therefor. Accordingly, granted one more following grounds: '(1) law policy raised because (i) absence of, (ii) departure from, officially reported precedent. '(2) factual erroneous record error prejudicially affects rights party. '(3) conduct ruling connection resulted prejudicial error. '(4) there important rule policy. '(d) With paragraph (c)(2) section, other grounds appropriate, said contain summary rulings together page citations transcript argument. allege facts timely presented director.' '(f) Failure preclude parties relitigating, related subsequent proceeding, was, been, Denial constitute affirmance relitigating proceeding.' supra, n. 2. Tenth Circuit accord First. Meyer Dairy, Inc. 429 697, 699—700. 105 Cong.Rec. 19770. 34th Annual Report, Table 3B, 201 (1970). 107 10223, 12905—12932. Rules, 102.67(b). 102.45(a). 101.14. There different standard prescribed Administrative Procedure Act. 706 (1964 ed., Supp. V). Universal Camera Corp. 340 474, 487, 71 456, 95 456.

Category: 6