National Affairs: Board v. Bench

In a resounding decision that put it in direct conflict with the Federal bench, the U. S. Labor Board last fortnight held National Electric Products Corp. in Ambridge, Pa. guilty of unfair labor practices under the Wagner Act. A Federal district court had held that a contract by which the corporation granted a closed shop to an A. F. of L. union was valid and must be obeyed. The Board flatly declared the contract was “void and of no effect” and must be ignored (TIME, Sept. 13). Last week the Board carried the controversy a step farther only to make a monkey of itself.

The reason which the Board had given for declaring the contract void was that its “precipitate granting” smacked of trickery since the corporation well knew that the A. F. of L. union “did not represent the free choice of a majority of its employes.” Therefore the Board ordered a plant election. Last week it was held. Result: 780-to-675 in favor of A. F. of L.

Although the company had apparently judged the temper of its workers more correctly than the Board, the case was not ended, for the ballots of 155 clerks and maintenance men were challenged by both A. F. of L. and C.I.O., and the election was thrown back into the lap cf the Labor Board. The broader question of the case —whether an employer should obey the Board or the bench when their orders conflict—also remained to be settled in what may well be another Supreme Court test of the Wagner Act.