Legal Document

337 U.S. 656 69 Supreme Court Reporter 1283 93 L.Ed. 1602 NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARDv.PITTSBURGH S.S. CO. Number 258. Argued. April 19, 1949. Decided June 20, Mr. Robert L. Stern, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Nathan Miller, New York City, respondent. Justice RUTLEDGE delivered the opinion of Court. 1 In 1945 National Labor Relations Board, petitioner here, issued its complaint charging respondent with commission certain unfair labor practices in course operating fleet Great Lakes bulk cargo vessels. As developed at a hearing before trial examiner, Board's charges were substance that 1944 interfered attempts by Maritime Union to organize respondent's seamen, purpose and ultimately achieved effect causing union's repudiation Board-sponsored election.1 Specifically, there was testimony tending show licensed personnel (officers) on ships word deed had expressed their unlicensed seamen bitter hostility union members; president, one Ferbert, written two letters every seaman covertly suggesting inaccurate fashion possible disadvantages NMU representation; Shartle discharged from employ engaging organization. Some testimony, tendered witnesses, controverted witnesses; also introduced it strictly enjoined remain wholly neutral weeks leading up including Board election. 2 The examiner concluded organization, violation §§ 7 8(1) Wagner Act, 29 United States Code KF62 157, 158(1), Annotated KF65 U5 fired an employee activity, § 8(3), 158(3), 158(3). Respondent's exceptions examiner's findings briefed argued accordance usual p ocedure. On August 13, 1946, adopted without substantial change, order requiring cease desist antiunion conduct reinstate wrongfully full seniority reimbursement lost wages. N.L.R.B. 1395. 3 Two months later petitioned Appeals review order; filed counterpetition enforcement order. 5, 1948, court announced decision refusing enforcement. 6 Cir., 167 Federal Reporter, 2nd Series 126. did not determine whether evidence, if credited, would support findings. Instead held based thereon invalidated latent, pervasive unremedied bias examiner—a found apparent face record: 'Without exception, whenever conflict witnesses (Company) be untrustworthy those reliable. * It is enough say unvarying witness because falsity, evasion or faint recollection, along consistent exaltation as truthful, forthright accurate, destroys completely any confidence might otherwise placed stamp(s) them arbitrary. having toto, blanket pro forma are no better posture. With due respect rule binding upon us becomes impossible sustain adoption report which, face, so clearly bears imprint prejudice lacks all semblance fair judicial determination.' pages 128—129. To court's determination, we granted certiorari. 335 857, 130. 4 First: We constrained reject conclusion objective finder fact could resolve factual conflicts arising legal proceeding favor litigant. ordinary lawsuit, civil criminal, normally depends resolution which version facts dispute accepted trier fact. Where number increases, arithmetical chance uniform diminishes—but does disappear. Yet mere controls our present inquiry, disputed litigation random unknowns isolated equations—they related human behavior, chiseling facet helps mark borders next. Thus, determination litigated facts, who has been unreliable issue may properly accorded little weight Accordingly, total rejection opposed view cannot itself impugn integrity competence gist matter put well Fifth Circuit, speaking through Judge Hutcheson, granting NLRB order: 5 'The alone Respondent makes much, Examiner uniformly credited discredited Respondent, though few many, furnish basis finding such partiality existed therefore hearings unfair. Unless evidence carries own death wound, is, incredible therefore, law irrefutable truth, nature discredited, credit discredit other bias.'2 Suffice this case attention called 'carries wound,' none truth.' Indeed, careful scrutiny record belies believe testimony3 he even believed issue.4 Rather, printed transcript suggests thoughtful discriminating evaluation facts. Second: A question remains proper disposition case. urged that, being order, should remand instructions enforce further delay. Without doubting existence here under Consolidated Edison company versus 305 197, 229, 59 206, 216, 83 126, warrant findings, standard For questions have arisen Administrative Procedure 60 Statutes-at-Large 237, 1001 et seq., Taft-Hartley 61 136, Supp. I, 141 enacted between issuance Appeals' decision, applicable way affect procedures scope orders. applicability either both these statutes apparently dealt Appeals, neither discussed nor cited cases discussing them; impact b en elaboration These considered first instance Appeals. afford opportunity, cause proceedings inconsistent opinion. 8 Reversed remanded. 9 JACKSON reserves sufficiency Act Court's return voted acceptance collective-bargaining agent: rejected vote 889 720. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co., 161 798, 800; see Auburn Foundry, 119 33 , 333. example, following footnote his intermediate report: 'No attempt will made describe statements activities claimed counsel constitute part anti-union conduct. mention incidents undersigned regards insubstantial character unsupported preponderance credible evidence.' 1402, n. 6. Important issues arose, over responsible distributing (1) copies speech hostile Member Congress, (2) pamphlet entitled 'NMU fights Jim Crow,' wished withhold circulation fear react unfavorably advocating racial equality. say: admitted responsibility Ferbert (see text, supra), but denied distributed pamphlet, establishes, came mails. There showing distribution speech. Crow set forth Union's opposition discrimination employment, admittedly publication Union. While organizers use campaign vessels, some assertion manner supervisory used subject playing prejudices, antagonisms fears employees, likewise bare tracing Consequently, disclaimer responsibility, speech.' 1400.

Classification Label: 8