Court Opinion

ID: 9463191
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 23:00:22.567715+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:37:58.483271
License: Public Domain

CRAVEN, Chief Judge
(dissenting):
Paraphrasing my brothers, it is not clear to me why they want to “get into the act,” p. 1088, especially since this act is committed by the Congress to the Board. Indeed, we have been told to stay out of such matters and warned that our duty to canvass
“the whole record” in order to ascertain substantiality does not furnish a calculus of value by which a reviewing court can assess the evidence. Nor was it intended to negative the function of the Labor Board as one of those agencies presumably equipped or informed by experience to deal with a specialized field of knowledge, whose findings within that field carry the authority of an expertness which courts do not possess and therefore must respect. Nor does it mean that even as to matters not requiring expertise a court may displace the Board’s choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo. (Emphasis added.)
Universal Camera Corp. v. NLRB, 340 U.S. 488-490, 71 S.Ct. 465 (1950).
*1089My disagreement is not so much with my brothers’ belief that they can draw an inference as well or better than the Board as it is with their belief that they are empowered to do it.
For most of September and all of October the company knew of its employees’ grievances and changed not. On November 1 it learned of Union activity and claimed majority representation. Five days later the Company acted unilaterally — giving the employees what they sought. Coincidence, my brothers say. To thwart the Union campaign, says the Board, and points to the new manager’s testimony that he did not consider making changes until after the November 1 Union demand. Surely, management’s testimony constitutes substantial evidence.
Having sought in vain for the authority of the court to substitute its viewpoint for that of the Board, I respectfully dissent.