Court Opinion

ID: 9453186
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 18:05:42.48147+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:33:33.088163
License: Public Domain

EDWARDS, Circuit Judge
(concurring in part and dissenting in part.)
I concur with the careful opinion of the court, except for that portion which deals with the pre-election announcement of the job evaluation program.
This announcement (made by letter to each employee on February 12, 1965, and elaborated on at a meeting of all employees on February 15, 1965) was the *115first plantwide application of the job evaluation program. It implied a possible take-home pay increase for all who heard it, depending in part on the employee’s “attitude.” It was made by the company executive vice president to a captive audience of employees on the eve of an NLRB election. In the same speech the executive vice president made clear (as he had a right to do) the company’s opposition to the union.
These facts, in my opinion, constituted substantial evidence of interference with these employees’ “freedom of choice for or against unionization.” N. L. R. B. v. Exchange Parts Co., 375 U.S. 405, 409, 84 S.Ct. 457, 460, 11 L.Ed.2d 435 (1964).
The Board’s finding of this § 8(a) (1) violation seems to me to justify the Board’s remedial order as entered, and I would grant enforcement.