Court Opinion

ID: 9643449
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 20:29:22.836621+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:00.586580
License: Public Domain

SIBLEY, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
In addition to what Judge FOSTER has said I wish to emphasize one thing. The Board found that the crew members they ordered reinstated “were discharged for the reason that they joined and assisted the NM U.” This finding was rested mainly on acts and statements attributed to certain inferior ship’s officers which indicated opposition to the NMU. It clearly appears that the decision to discharge all the crews and tie up the ships was made by the Company’s officials, as was the decision to reemploy crews and sail them again. The motives and intention^ of the officials who made these decisions are to be attributed to the Company, and riot those of ship’s officers who had nothing to do with the decisions. The Company’s officials took charge of the situation and such authority as the ship’s officers might ordinarily have had to act and speak for the Company in the matters at issue was superseded. The evidence does not show that the Company’s officials were guilty of an unfair labor practice, but shows that they acted fairly and in good faith, and with due regard for their duty to the public and to their contracts with their employees.