Court Opinion

ID: 9455879
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 19:36:09.091846+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:34:46.316994
License: Public Domain

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING
The Clerk is directed to file the Board’s untimely petition for rehearing.
There is also before us the petitioner’s ‘Motion for Clarification’ of our opinion of April 30, 1970. In its petition, the Board has requested that we modify our opinion by providing that on the remand “the Board is not precluded from considering the propriety of ordering restoration of the status quo ante” pending bargaining negotiations should it find a violation of the duty to bargain, and that restoration is an appropriate remedy therefor.
We have concluded that because the decision concerning remedies initially lies with the Board, the Board’s petition, in part, is well taken. Upon remand the Board is not precluded from ordering any appropriate remedy provided by law, subject, of course, to judicial review.
No remedy, whether for the benefit of Local 274 or for individual drivers, however, can be sustained unless it is predicated upon a finding that Carnation unlawfully refused to bargain. To the extent that our former opinion may have suggested that remedies previously ordered for discharged drivers may be sustained without a finding that Carnation refused to bargain, it is hereby corrected.
As modified, the opinion of April 30, 1970, is adhered to and the petition for rehearing is denied.