7. What constitutes settlement. Since Section 8 provides in effect that no ballot shall be taken on the thirtieth day if the dispute has been settled prior to that date, the Board is frequently required to determine whether or not an effective settlement has been made. In so doing, the Board has administratively determined that a withdrawal of the notice on the part of the representative filing it evidences a settlement, provided that the withdrawal derives from a decision on the part of the representative not to attempt to bring about an interruption of production. In every case where a withdrawal has been obtained, the Board has halted its proceedings at that point. While for the most part the function of settling disputes is vested in other agencies, the Board has consistently endeavored, in cooperation with other agencies, to facilitate an adjustment of the dispute. In order to give the Conciliation Service of the Department of Labor full freedom to obtain a settlement of the dispute in its early stages, the Board, by agreement with that agency, refrains from making an investigation or taking any action whatsoever during the first 7 days after a notice is filed. The success of the cooperative efforts of the governmental agencies to settle disputes is best evidenced by the fact that more than 50 percent of all notices filed have been withdrawn before the ballot could be conducted. 8. The question.-The question upon which the employees cast their votes is prescribed by the statute and is stated in precisely the same terms in each case. It is: Do you wish to permit an interruption of war production in wartime as a result of this dispute? Procedure The keynote of the procedure devised by the Board for administering Section 8 is speed. This is because of the rigid time limits imposed by the statute, which requires (1) that the ballot shall be conducted "forthwith" on the thirtieth day after notice is filed, and (2) that upon the conclusion of the balloting, the results shall "forthwith" be certified and made open to public inspection. Since time is thus made of the essence both before and after the vote is conducted, the statute does not provide for formal hearings. Accordingly the Board has not found it desirable to employ any such time-consuming formal proceedings either before or after the balloting, since to do so would run counter to the purposes of the statute. The Board does, however, give all parties to the dispute ample opportunity to present their views on the matters under consideration and to present any information which they deem material. The procedure which has been adopted by the Board entails (1) the conduct of a complete investigation of the dispute by the Board's Regional Office and the preparation by the Regional Office of a written report to the Board, setting forth in detail the relevant facts, together with its recommendations as to the contents of the ballot and the composition of the voting group; (2) review of this report by the Washington staff and determination by the Board of the questions presented and the contents of the ballot; A (3) preparation for, and conduct by the Regional Office of the secret ballot on the thirtieth day in accordance with the Board's instructions, followed immediately by a telegraphic report of the results by the Regional Office to the Board; and (4) immediate certification by the Board to the President of the results of the balloting. With respect to the actual balloting, the Board utilizes, for the most part, the procedures and techniques which have been established and tested by years of experience in conducting representation elections under the National Labor Relations Act. In the main, these established procedures have been found to be equally well-suited to the conduct of ballots under the War Labor Disputes Act. In the interest of speed, however, certain modifications in the procedure have been found necessary. Thus, while the parties are permitted to challenge the eligibility of employees to vote, the challenges are ruled on by the Board's agent at the time they are made, in order to eliminate the delay entailed in withholding ruling until a later date. And for the same reason, no provision is made for a formal Election Report or for formal Objections to the conduct of the ballot, as in the representation cases. In lieu thereof, immediately upon the conclusion of the balloting, the agent conducting the vote telegraphs the results to the Board, and the Board, in turn, directly transmits them to the President. The inflexibility of the time limitations under which the Board must operate and the necessity for adopting a streamlined, speedy procedure are best illustrated by the fact that the first two steps set forth above must be completed well within the 30 days, the third step "forthwith" on the thirtieth day; and the fourth step "forthwith" thereafter. Cases Handled From the date of the passage of the Act to October 15, 1943, a total of 367 dispute notices were filed. Since many of these involve employer associations or groups of employers, the number of plants covered by the notices substantially exceeds the number of notices filed. As of this date, 236 of these notices or 64.3 percent had been withdrawn in various stages of procedure prior to the end of the 30-day waiting period. In the greater number of these cases, however, 1 or more of the 3 steps in the Board's procedure, as outlined above, had already been taken before the withdrawal was obtained. Sixty-seven of the notices were still pending on October 15, the 30 days not yet having elapsed and no withdrawal having been obtained. In 63 cases, secret ballots were conducted, some of them involving a number of separate plants or operations. In 58 cases, the majority of the employees voted in favor of an interruption, and in 6, the majority of employees or the majority in 1 of 2 groups involved, registered a negative choice. In only 19 cases, however, according to available information, had an interruption of production actually followed an affirmative vote. In 5 cases strikes had occurred either before or after a notice was withdrawn. TELEGRAPH MERGER ACT After extended consideration by Congress, an amendment to the Communications Act of 19343 was enacted, and approved on March 6, 1943, which permitted, subject to various statutory requirements and the approval of the Federal Communications Commission, the merger of domestic telegraph carriers. Section 222 (f) of this amendment sets forth a series of provisions for the protection of the employees of carriers which may be merged under the terms of the statute, and specifies that the employees affected are entitled to enforcement of their rights through the same remedies provided under the National Labor Relations Act. The National Labor Relations Board, subject to review by the courts of the United States, is vested with jurisdiction to enforce such rights. The rights granted to employees, subject to the conditions and limitations set forth in the statute, include the following: right to continue employment for specified period; right to protection against reduction in compensation; right to protection against assignment to work inconsistent with past training and experience in the telegraph industry; right to specified severance pay in case of legal discharge; right to preferential hiring status in case of legal discharge; right to traveling and moving expenses of employee and family in case of transfer from one community to another; right to continuance of existing pension, health, disability and death benefits; right of restoration to former employment status after discharge from the armed services; right to protection against discharge, furlough or reduction in compensation during 6-month period preceding merger; right to continue existing hours of employment as provided in collective bargaining agreement. On May 25, 1943, an application for approval of a merger plan was filed with the Federal Communications Commission by the Western Union Telegraph Co. and the Postal Telegraph Co. Hearings on the merger proposal were opened by the Commission on July 7, 1943, and on September 28, 1943, an order was issued approving the merger plan, which contemplated the purchase of the Postal Telegraph Co. by Western Union. The merger was effected on October 7, 1943. The National Labor Relations Board has designated a Telegraph Merger Committee, of which the Executive Secretary is chairman, and the Chief Trial Examiner, an Associate General Counsel, and an Assistant Director of the Field Division are members, to coordinate the Board's activities under the Merger Act, and to serve in a liaison capacity with the Federal Communications Commission, and representatives of the companies and employees affected. 3 57 Stat. 5 (1943). The Board has adopted, after consultation with the parties affected, an amendment to its Rules and Regulations which provides for the application of its regular procedure in unfair labor practice cases to cases in which telegraph employees have been denied rights granted under the Communications Act. Under this procedure, employees affected, or their representatives, may file a charge with the Board's Regional Office in the area involved, which then forms a basis for institution of the Board's regular informal and formal procedures. While the recency of the actual merger does not permit an accurate appraisal of the nature or extent of the problems which may arise under the labor-protection provisions of the Merger Act, the Board will endeavor to foster their solution through mutual action on the part of the company and the labor organizations involved, while ensuring through its own procedures that employees are afforded prompt and full protection of their statutory rights. |