McGoldrick Lumber Co

In the Matter of MCGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY, A CORPORATION; INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYEES' UNION, INC., A CORPORATION; AND INDUS- TRIAL EMPLOYEES' UNION, INC., LOCAL No., 76, DISTRICT 9 and LUM- BER AND SAWMILL WORKERS UNION, LOCAL No. 2552 In the Matter Of POTLATCH FORESTS, INC., A CORPORATION; INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYEES' UNION, INC., A CORPORATION; AND INDUSTRIAL EM- PLOYEES' UNION, INC., LOCALS Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 7 7, 78, AND 80, DISTRICT 10 and OREGON AND WASHINGTON COUNCIL OF LUMBER AND SAWMILL WORKERS UNION, AFFILIATED WITH THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR In the Matter of C. D. JOHNSON LUMBER CORPORATION; WILLAMETTE VALLEY LUMBER OPERATORS ASSOCIATION, INC., A CORPORATION; IN- DUSTRIAL EMPLOYEES' UNION7 INC., A CORPORATION; AND INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYEES' UNION, INo., LOCAL No. 50; DISTRICT 1 and OREGON AND WASHINGTON COUNCIL OF LUMBER AND SAWMILL WORKERS UNION, AFFILIATED WITH THE A. F. OF L.; COLUMBIA RIVER DIS- TRICT .COUNCIL No. 5, LUMBER AND SAWMILL WORKERS, AFFILIATED WITH I. W. A., AND LUMBER AND SAWMILL WORKERS UNION, LOCALS No. 2803, AND No. 2751, AFFILIATED WITH I. W. A. Cases Nos. 0-639 to C-642, inclusive.Decided January 205, 1940 Lumber Industry-Interference, Restraint, and Coercion: discriminatory re- fusal to place employees laid off for cause because of their union affiliation ; discriminatory lay-off of striking employees going through picket line on passes because of union affiliation ; requiring membership in company-dominated labor organization as a condition of employment; activities by which employers dominated and interfered with the formation and administration of labor organizations and contributed financial and other support to them ; similar activities by association of employers-Company-Dominated Unions: Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen (4L) : employers helped to form ; employers were members of ; employers shared control of, with employees ; employers con- tributed dues to, equally with employees ; constitution of, perpetuated equal division of power between employers and employees ; locals of, existed at opera- tions of respondents : established at instance of employers and 4L; aided and' supported by employers and 4L; 4L and 4L Locals at operations of respondents found to be company dominated ; Industrial Employees' Union (I. E. U.) : resulted from reorganization of employer-dominated 4L; reorganization of 4L:. instigated by employers ; effected with approval of employer representatives on, 4L board of directors after they had seen a copy of the proposed constitution, of new organization and after they had discussed and advised on the problems• confronting it; approved also by employee directors of employer-dominated 4f,:. 19 N. L. R. B., No. 93. . 887 888 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD accomplished with aid of members of paid administrative staff of 4L; I. E. U. a continuation of the 4L : not a new corporation ; constitution, drawn by employee directors of 4L, modeled after and substantially similar to that of 4L; directors, administrative staff, and field officers taken over almost without exception from 4L; locals, their members, officers, and committees taken over almost wholly from 4L; parts of 4L structure not found in I. E. U.: employer membership eliminated : counteracted by action of Operators' Association, com- posed in part of former 4L employers, in entering into a contract with the I. E. U. which created machinery similar to that of the 4L for collective bargaining and the settlement of disputes ; elimination of employer dues : lost significance because I. E. U. took over assets of 4L, at least one half of which resulted. from employer contributions ; domination of and interference with the formation . and administration of the I. E. U. Locals at the operations of the respondents and the contribution of support to them; I. E. U. Locals: supported by employer-dominated I. E. U. and afforded support to I. E. U., found to be a part thereof ; came into being at operations of respondents as a result of the reorganization of employer-dominated 4L Locals; reorganization accomplished with support of respondents : meetings on company property, sometimes during working hours ; notices on company bulletin boards ; supervisors spoke in favor of I. E. U. and solicited membership; respondents antagonistic to bona fide competing unions ; I. E. U. Locals substantially the same as employer-dominated 4L Locals they replaced : of eers the same; assets taken over ; initiation fees not required of former 4L members; I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals at operations of respondents disestablished; Employer-Association-Dominated Labor Organi- zation: interference with the administration of the I. E. U. and contribution of support to it, by association of employers-Contract: with company-dominated unions, abrogated-Check-Off: for company-dominated unions ; employers ordered to reimburse employees for-Labor Organizations: organizations though they may be acting in the interest of an employer, as-Procedure: complaint dismissed as to labor organizations since Act declares only employers can engage in unfair labor practices-Employee Status: change of status of employees laid off to strikers, upon their election to continue on strike rather than return to work in accordance with respondents' offer-Discrimination: requirement of membership in dominated organization as condition of employment-Strike: caused by unfair labor practices-Reinstatement: ordered : for 'employees dis- criminatorily laid off; for employees discriminatorily refused jobs after being laid off for cause ; for unfair labor practice strikers, upon application-Back Pay: awarded : employees discriminatorily laid off and those discriminatorily refused jobs after being laid off for cause; from date of discrimination to date of reinstatement or offer of reinstatement ; unfair labor practice strikers : from date of application pursuant to the Order to date of offer of reinstatement pursuant to the Order-Settlement: stipulation by one employer providing that the proposed order against it might be made final, except that a proviso was added to than paragraph of the Order directing it to reimburse its employees for dues or fees deducted from their pay since the passage of the Act on behalf of the company-dominated unions, limiting its liability to $5,000, and making any payments contingent upon employees making claims for refunds within 90 days after entry of the Order. Mr: John J. Babe and Mr. William R. Consedine , for the Board. Randall cC Danskin, by Mr. C. D. Randall', of Spokane, Wash., for McGoldrick. McGOLDRIOK LUMBER, 00 KPANY.- - 889 Mr.-Robert H. Elder, -of Coeur: d'Alene, Idaho,. for Potlatch Forests. McCamant, Thompson, King c6 Wood, of Portland, Oreg., for Johnson. Mr. W. C. Ruegnitz, of Portland, Oreg., for the Operators' Associ- ation. Jaureguy d Tooze, of Portland, Oreg., and Mr. M. C. Riebeling, of Portland, Oreg., for the I. E. U., I. E. U. Local 76, District 9, I. E. U. Locals 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80, and I. E. U. Local 50. Green, Tanner c6 Boesen, by Mr. B. A. Green, and Mr. Chris Boesen, of Portland, Oreg., for the Oregon and Washington Council, the Columbia River Council, and Locals 2803 and 2751, I. W. A. Mr. Ben Anderson, of Portland, Oreg., Mr. James J. Molthan, of Seattle, Wash., and Mr. Paul Coughlin, of Seattle, Wash., for the I. W. A. Mr. Frank B. Reid, of Eugene, Oreg., for the Oregon and Wash- ington Council. Mr. Warren L. Sharfman, of counsel to the Board. DECISION AND ORDER STATEMENT OF THE CASE On July 7, 1937, Lumber & Sawmill Workers Union,, Local No. 2552, herein called Local No. 2552, filed with the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region (Seattle; Washington) a charge that Mc- Goldrick Lumber Company, Spokane, Washington, herein called McGoldrick, had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor prac- tices affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 8 (1), (2), and (3) and 2 (6) and (7) of the National Labor Relations Act, 49 Stat. 449, herein called the Act. On September 22, 1937, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, issued a complaint signed by said Regional Director, alleging that McGoldrick had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (2) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. On September 29, 1937, the Board issued an amended complaint against McGoldrick, Industrial Employees' Union, Inc., herein called the I. E. U., and Tndustrial Employees' Union, Inc., Local No. 76, District 9, herein called I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, signed by said Regional Director, alleging that McGoldrick, through the other respondents, had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices,- within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), and (3) and Section 2 (6) and (7) 890 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD of :the Act. In respect to the unfair labor ' practices -the' amended complaint alleged in substance : (1) that McGoldrick had dominated and interfered with the administration of the Loyal Legion.of Log- gers and Lumbermen, herein called the 4L, and the Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen, Local No. 76, District 9, herein called 41, Local No., 76, District 9, and contributed financial and other support to them, and had also dominated and interfered with the formation and administration of the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 76; District 9,.successors to the 4L and 4L Local No. 76, District 9, and contributed financial and other support to them; (2) that McGoldrick, since May 1, 1937, had required as a condition of employment that employees belong to the I. E. U.; (3) that McGoldrick had engaged in a cam- paign to discredit Local No. 2552 and otherwise intimidated and coerced its employees in order to prevent them from forming, joining, or assisting labor organizations of their own choosing. The complaint and accompanying notice of hearing were duly served upon McGoldrick, the I. E. U., and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9. In its answer, dated October 2, 1937, McGoldrick denied the material allegations of the amended complaint, but consented, to the entry of a cease and desist order against it if the Board would order an election within 30 days. McGoldrick also moved to dismiss the complaint if its offer was not accepted by the Board. In answers dated October 5, 1937, the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, also denied substantially all of the material allegations of the amended complaint. They also filed motions to dismiss the com- plaint on the ground that the Board had no jurisdiction to issue a complaint against a labor organization, and because the complaint failed to state facts which, if true, would justify an order ' against the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9. On, September 13, 1937, Oregon and Washington Council of Lum- ber and Sawmill Workers, affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, herein called the Oregon 'and Washington Council, filed with the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region charges that Potlatch Forests, Inc., Lewiston, Idaho, herein called Potlatch For- ests, and the I. E. U. had engaged in and were engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce within the meaning of Sections 8'(1) and (2) and 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. On September 22, 1937, the Board issued a complaint signed by said Regional Director, alleging that Potlatch Forests had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (2) and Section 2 (6) and ^(7) of the Act. On September 30, 1937, the Board issued an amended complaint against Potlatch Forests, the I. E. U., and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69; 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77; 78, and 80, signed-by said MCGOLDRIC'K LUMBER 001N4-PANY 891 Regional Director, alleging that Potlatch' Forests, through the other respondents, had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor prac- tices, within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), and (3) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. In respect to the unfair labor practices the allegations of the amended complaint 'were similar to those of the amended complaint issued against McGoldrick, the I. E. U., and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, heretofore noted, except that the parties involved were Potlatch Forests, the I. E. U., I. E. U. Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, and Lumber & Sawmill Workers Union, Local No. 2584, herein called Local No. 2584. The complaint and accompanying notice of hearing were duly served upon Potlatch Forests, the I. E. U., and the I. E. U. Locals named as respondents., In its answer, dated October 4, 1937, Pot- latch Forests denied the material allegations of the amended com- plaint, but consented to the entry of a cease and desist order against it if the Board would order an election within 30 days. Potlatch Forests ..also-.moved to dismiss the complaint if its offer was not accepted by the Board. The I. E. U. and the I. E. U. Locals named as respondents,' also filed answers denying substantially 'all of the material allegations of the amended complaint. The I. E. U. also filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the grounds stated in the McGoldrick case. On September. 13, 1937, the Oregon and Washington Council, and on September 28, 1937, Columbia River District Council No. 5, Lum- ber and Sawmill Workers, herein called the Columbia River Council, affiliated with the International Woodworkers of America, herein called the I. W. A., filed with the Regional Director for the Nine- teenth Region, charges that C. D. Johnson Lumber Corporation, Port- land, Oregon, herein called Johnson, Willamette Valley Operators' Association, Eugene, Oregon, herein called the Operators' Association, the I. E. U., and Industrial Employees' Union Inc., Local No. 50, District 1, herein called I. E. U. Local No. 50, had engaged in and were,eirgaging_ in unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (2) arid.Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. On September 22, 1937, the Board issued a complaint signed by said Regional Director alleging that Johnson had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices 'affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 8 (1) and (2) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. On September 29, 1937, the Board issued an amended com- plaint against Johnson, the Operators' Association, the I. E. U., i I. E. U. Locals Nos. 26 and 75 did not appear although properly served. 2 Except I. E. U. Locals Nos. 26 and 75. See footnote No.•1: , 892 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and I. E. U. Local No. 50, signed by said Regional Director, alleging that Johnson, through the other respondents, had engaged in and was engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (1), (2), and (3) and Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. In respect to the unfair labor practices the allegations of the amended com- plaint were similar to those of the amended complaint issued against McGoldrick, the I. E. U., and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, here- tofore noted, except that the parties involved were Johnson, the Operators' Association, which was alleged to have been formed by former employer members of the 4L as a part of a plan to dominate and control the I. E. U., the I. E. U., and I. E. U. Local No. 50, and the amended complaint also alleged that Johnson discharged 400 of its employees because of their membership in Local No. 2803, I. W. A., and Local No. 2751, I. W. A. The complaint and accompanying notice of hearing were duly served upon Johnson, the Operators' Association, the I. E. U., and I. E. U. Local No. 50. In its answer, dated October 4, 1937, Johnson denied the material averments of the amended complaint, but con- sented to the entry of a cease and desist order against it if the Board would order an election within 30 days. Johnson also moved to dismiss the complaint if its offer was not accepted by the Board. The Operators' Association also filed an answer in which it denied such of the material allegations of the amended complaint as to which it had any knowledge. The I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 50 also filed answers denying substantially all of the material averments of the amended complaint. They also filed motions to dismiss the com- plaint on the grounds stated in the McGoldrick case. On October 5, 1937, the Board, acting pursuant to Article II, Sec- tion 37 (b), of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regular tions=Series 1, as amended, ordered the afore-mentioned cases '- con- solidated for the purposes of hearing. Pursuant to notices duly served, a hearing was held in Portland, Oregon, from October 18 through November 17, 1937, in Toledo, Oregon, from November 22, 1937, through April 2, 1938, in Spokane, Washington, from April 6 through April 22, 1938, in Lewiston, Idaho, from April 23 through May 14, 1938, and again in Portland, Oregon, from May 17 through May 23, 1938, before Harry Hazel, the Trial Examiner duly designated by the Board. The Board, Johnson, Potlatch Forests, McGoldrick, the I. E. U., the I. E. U. Locals, the Oregon and Washington Council, the Columbia River Council, the I. W. A., and Locals Nos. 2803 and 2751, I. W. A., were all represented by counsel and participated in the hearing. The Operators' Associa- ' Cases Nos. XIX-C.-138 (McGoldrick), XIX-C=206 ' (Potlatch Forests),' SIX-C-213 (Johnson ), and XIX-C-221 (Johnson). MCGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY 893 tion was represented by its secretary-manager, W. C. Ruegnitz, who participated in the hearing. Full opportunity to be heard, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, and to introduce evidence bearing upon the issues was afforded all parties. Early in the hearing the Trial Examiner denied the motions of the I. E. U., I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, and I. E. U. Local No. 50 to • dismiss the complaints as against them in each of the proceedings. Shortly thereafter, I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67,'68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80 filed a motion to dismiss the complaint against them, which the Trial Examiner denied. The Board has reviewed the Trial Ex- aminer's rulings on these motions and finds them to be in error. The I. E. U. and each of the I.. E. U. Locals in question are labor organiza- tions within the meaning of. Section 2 (5) of the Act, and as such can- not be termed "employers" within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act even though they may be acting in the interest of an employer.4 Section 8 of the Act declares that it shall be an unfair labor practice for an "employer" to engage in certain activities. As the I. E. U. and the I. E. U. Locals are not employers they cannot of themselves engage in unfair labor practices, and the Board will not pass upon their activities as distinguished from the activities of employers who may act through them. We hereby reverse the Trial Examiner's rulings and grant the motions filed by the I. E. U. and the I. E. U. Locals to dismiss the complaints as against them. On November 1, 1937, the Oregon and Washington Council made three separate motions, viz, one to withdraw the charges it had filed against Johnson, one to withdraw the charges it had filed against Potlatch Forests, and one to withdraw the charges filed by its affiliate, Local No. 2552, against McGoldrick. The motions were referred to the Board for decision, and on November 4, 1937, the Board denied them. . During the course of the hearing the Trial Examiner granted the motion of counsel for the Board to amend paragraphs IV, V, XV (6), and XVI of the amended complaint against Johnson by adding the name of Local No. 63J. W. A., the successor to Local No. 2751, as one of the labor organizations, membership in which was discouraged by Johnson. Johnson then amended its answer to the amended complaint against it to contain a denial of the allegations added by the Board. At the hearing the I. E. U. offered in evidence certain papers, the signers of which, numbering over 500 persons, certified that they were members of the I. E. U. Local No. 50, that they reaffirmed their desire to be and to remain members of I. E. U. Local No. 50, that they re- * The I . E. U. and the I. E. U. Locals are "employers " within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act in so far .as their relations to their employees are concerned. Such relationships are not involved in this proceeding. 894 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD affirmed their choice of it as their collective bargaining agency, and that their membership in I. E. U. Local No. 50 was voluntary and free. from coercion and intimidation from any source. The Trial Examiner ruled that the papers were inadmissible, and we affirm his rulings At the conclusion of the hearing the Trial Examiner granted the motion of the Board's attorney to conform the pleadings to the proof. The Board has reviewed the rulings made by the Trial Egaminei on motions, objections, and other matters during the course of the hearing, and finds, except as noted above, that no prejudicial errors were committed. With the exceptions noted, the rulings are hereby affirmed. On May 25, 1938, the Board, acting pursuant to Article II, Section 37 (a), of National Labor Relations Board Rules and Regulations- Series 1, as amended, ordered that these proceedings be transferred to and continued before the Board. On June 3, 1938, McGoldrick filed exceptions to the Board's order transferring the proceedings to itself. The Board has considered these exceptions, finds them to be without merit, and hereby overrules them. At the same time that McGoldrick filed the afore-mentioned ex- ceptions, it also filed a motion requesting that it be furnished with a copy of the Board's proposed findings of fact and recommendations, and thereafter be given a reasonable opportunity to request oral argu- ment or file a brief thereon. On September 7, 1938, the Board, acting pursuant to Article II, Section 38 (d), of the Rules and Regulations, ordered that proposed findings of fact, proposed conclusions of law, and a proposed order be issued in these proceedings, and that the parties should have the right, within 10 days after their receipt, to request permission to file exceptions thereto and a brief with the Board and to request oral argument before the Board. The Board ordered further that no Intermediate Report be issued by the Trial Examiner. On July 10, 1939, the Board issued Proposed Findings of Fact, Proposed Conclusions of Law, and Proposed Order in these proceed- ings, copies of which were duly served upon all parties. On July -14 the Board informed all parties that they were given 30 days from the receipt of the Proposed Findings of Fact, Proposed Conclusions of Law, and Proposed Order within which to file exceptions and to re- quest oral argument and permission to file briefs. See Matter of Emsco Derrick and Equipment Company (D. & B. Division ) and Steet Workers Organizing Committee, 11 N. L. R. B. 79, and Matter of Servel,.Inc. and United ,Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, Local .No. 1002, N. L. R. B. 1295. Cf. National Labor Relations Board v. Louisville Refining Co., 102 F. (2d) 67& (C. C. A. 6). McGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY 895 Exceptions to the Proposed Findings of Fact, Proposed, Conclu- sions of Law, and Proposed Order were filed by Potlatch Forests, the Operators' Association, the I. E. U. and the I. E. U. Locals,' Johnson, and McGoldrick within the allotted time. Potlatch Forests, Johnson, and McGoldrick also requested that they be afforded an opportunity for oral argument before the Board and' that they be granted permission to file briefs with the Board. Potlatch Forests, also filed a petition "For Leave To Reopen The Record And Adduce Additional. Evidence" in the event that its exceptions were overruled by the Board. This petition was later withdrawn. Pursuant to notice, a hearing was scheduled to be held before the Board on September 5, 1939, for the purpose of oral argument. None of the parties appeared at the scheduled hearing. Potlatch Forests, Johnson, and McGoldrick each filed a brief with the Board in support of its exceptions within the time allotted by the Board for the filing of such briefs. On September 28, 1939, Potlatch Forests and Elwyn J. Eagen, Regional Director, National Labor Relations Board, Nineteenth Region, entered into a "Stipulation" for the settlement of the case involving Potlatch Forests. 7 . The "Stipulation" provides as follows : This stipulation made and entered into by and between Pot- latch Forests, Inc., a corporation, by and through its General Manager, C. L. Billings,' and its attorney, Robert H. Elder, and Elwyn J. Eagen, Regional Director, National Labor Relations Board, Nineteenth Region, WITNESSETH : WHEREAS Upon charges duly filed by Oregon and Washington Council of Lumber and Sawmill Workers. affiliated 'with the American Federation of Labor, the National Labor Relations Board by the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region, acting pursuant to authority granted in Section 10 (b) of the National Labor Relations Act (49 Stat. 449) and its Rules and Regulations, Series 1, as amended, Article IV, Section 1, issued its complaint on the 22nd day of September, 1937, against the respondent herein, WHEREAS a hearing was held on the said complaint, WHEREAS said Board did on or about July 10, 1939, issued its proposed Findings of Fact, Proposed Conclusions 'of Law, and Proposed Order in the above entitled matter, which were served upon all parties hereto, I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, I. E. U. Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69,- 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, and I. E. U. Local No. 50.' T Case No. C-640. 896 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD WHEREAS respondent herein has heretofore filed Exceptions to the Proposed Findings of Fact, Proposed Conclusions of Law and Proposed Order, and has also filed a Petition for Leave to Reopen the Record and Adduce Additional Evidence, and WHEREAS, the respondent, although still maintaining the truth of its Answer, and asserting its innocence of any violation of law in fact or intent, nevertheless in order to effect a-speedy determination of the issues involved, and to end the expense of litigation, desires to withdraw its said exceptions. to the Pro- posed Findings of Fact, Proposed Conclusions of Law and Pro- posed Order, and its said Petition for Leave to Reopen the Record and Adduce Additional Evidence, and permit said Board to make said Proposed Findings of Fact, Proposed Con- clusions of Law and Proposed Order final as to the respondent, provided that the Board amend section 2 (b) of its Proposed Order in the manner hereinafter set forth, Now, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated, admitted and agr eed as follows : That on the basis of this stipulation, the evidence adduced at the hearing, and the entire record herein, the respondent hereby expressly consents that the Proposed Findings of Fact, Pro- posed Conclusions of Law and Proposed Order may be made final as to it, and expressly consents that an Order may be entered by said Board making said Proposed Order its final Order, except that paragraph 2 (b) thereof shall read as follows: "Reimburse individually and in full, all employees who were, or still are, members of the 4L, 4L Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80, or the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80, or both, for all dues and fees which it has deducted from their wages, salaries; or other earnings, since July 5, 1935, on behalf of the 4L and 4L Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80 or, the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and, 80, or both : Provided, That the total amount of such reimburse- ment shall not exceed 5,000.00, and that reimbursement shall not be made until 90 days after the entry of this Order, and then only to the individuals who, during such 90 day period, present applications to the respondent for a refund of said dues and fees. "In the event that the total amount of the applications for refund of said dues and fees exceeds $5,000.00, each applicant shall be paid on a pro rata basis according to the amount of his .claim.." McGOLDRIUK LUMBER COMPANY -897 The respondent further stipulates that the Board may apply to the appropriate Circuit Court of Appeals, ' without notice to the respondent of the filing of a petition by the Board, which notice the respondent hereby expressly waives, and the respond- ent hereby further expressly consents that the Circuit Court of Appeals for the appropriate circuit may enter a decree enforc- ing the said Order of the Board, pursuant to this stipulation. It is further stipulated that this stipulation is subject to the approval of the National Labor Relations Board after submission to the Board in Washington, D. C., and shall be of no effect whatever until so approved, and that if said Board approves this stipulation, the respondent will, and hereby does request withdrawal of its said Exceptions and Petition. On October 4, 1939, the Board issued its order approving the above "Stipulation," making it a part of the record of the case and granting Potlatch Forests leave to withdraw its exceptions. and its petition "For Leave To Reopen The Record and To Adduce Addi- tional Evidence." The Board has considered the exceptions to the Proposed Findings of Fact, Proposed Conclusions of Law,- and Proposed Order, and the briefs in support thereof, and in so far as the exceptions are inconsistent with the findings, conclusions, and order set forth below, finds no merit in them. Upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : FINDINGS OF FACT L. THE BUSINESSES OF MCGOLDRICK, POTLATCH FORESTS, JOHNSON, AND THE OPERATORS' ASSOCIATION •A. McGoldrick McGoldrick is a Washington corporation organized in 1905 with its principal office and place of business in Spokane, Washington. It is engaged in a general logging, sawmill, mill, and manufacturing business. It cuts timber into logs, saws and mills logs into lumber and lumber products, and sells such products throughout the United States. McGoldrick operates a sawmill and manufacturing plant at Spokane, a logging camp near Fernwood, Idaho, and a logging camp in Pend Oreille County, Washington. McGoldrick owns. 33,476 acres of timberland, of which 31,674 acres are in Idaho and 2,265 in Washington. About 73.3 per cent of the logs cut at the Spokane mill during 1935 came from McGoldrick's timberlands in Idaho. In 1936 the 898. DECISIONS OF NATIONAL- LABOR RELATIONS BOARD figure was 69.6 per cent. The balance off the logs came from*Wash- ington: McGoldrick purchases about-10 per cent of the logs cut at the Spokane mill from independent contractors, the logs being shipped to it from Washington and Idaho in approximately equal proportions. - The principal production and sales figures for McGoldrick during the years 1935 and 1936 are shown in the accompanying table. 1935 1936 Lumber cut (board feet, timber scale) --------------------------------------- 46,363,533. 51, 372, 456 Sales ----------------------------------------------------------------------- $1,463,105 $1,830,278 Percent of lumber sold shipped out of Washington: By value-------------------- ------------------------------------------ 73.8 76 By footage-----------------'------- -------------------------------------- 84 87 The percentage of sales, by value, involving shipments outside of Washington, was substantially the same for the first 8 months of 1937 as it was for the years 1935 and 1936. B. Potlatch Forests Potlatch Forests is a Maine corporation which was authorized to do business in Idaho in 1931. Its main office is in Lewiston, Idaho. It is engaged in a general logging, sawmill, mill, and manufacturing. business . It cuts timber into logs, and saws and mills logs into lumber and lumber products. It operates sawmills and manufactur- ing plants at Lewiston, Potlatch, and Coeur d'Alene, Idaho. Potlatch Forests also operates 10 or 12 logging camps in Idaho for the pur- pose of procuring logs for its mills and manufacturing plants. It owns, or has timber rights to, 170,000 acres of timberland in Idaho which are valued at over $20,000,000. It owns or leases about 100 miles of rail spur lines, which are used to transport logs from the woods to interstate railroads which complete delivery to its mills. It also owns a majority of the stock of the Washington, Idaho, & Montana Railroad, an interstate common carrier, which transports some of Potlatch Forests' logs to its mills. -`During the year 1936 Potlatch Forests produced 224,829,526 board feet '0"f himber and sold 239,586,275 board feet of lumber. All of its sales ' of lumber, amounting in value to $7,344,362.48, were made to'-the. Weyerhauser Sales Corporation in Idaho under a contract. Potlatch ;Forests shipped lumber thus sold directly to the customers of:: the Weyerhauser Sales Corporation. In excess of 51 per cent was shipped out of Idaho. Potlatch Forests also sold some of its log production.,in' Idaho,' but shipped the logs out of Idaho: In 1936 such shipments amounted to approximately 10,000,000 board feet - McGOLDRIC'K LUMBER- COMPANY 899' (log scale), but in 1937 they amounted to only 2,000,000 to 3,000,000 board feet (log scale). - - Potlatch Forests admitted that for the purposes of this -proceeding it was engaged in interstate commerce. C. Johnson Johnson, a Nevada corporation, is authorized to do business in Oregon' and maintains its principal' office in Portland, Oregon.. It is engaged in a general logging, sawmill, mill, and manufacturing business-cutting timber into logs, and sawing and milling logs into lumber and lumber products which it sells throughout the United States. It operates a sawmill and, manufacturing plant at Toledo, Oregon, a logging camp near Siletz, Oregon, and sales offices in Los Angeles and San Francisco, California. Johnson has a 'contract to purchase timber from a tract of some 11,000 acres of timberland' located in Lincoln County, Oregon, and it secures its logs from that source. In the year ending November 30, 1936, Johnson sold 117,525,305 board feet of lumber for $2,459,575. Johnson shipped 90.3 per cent of the lumber sold to points outside of Oregon. During the first 10 months of 1937 Johnson received $2,230,792 from the sale' of 94,681,521 board feet of lumber which required shipment to points outside of Oregon. D. The Operators' A ssociation . The Operators' Association is an Oregon corporation, organized on April 30, 1937, with: its principal office in Portland, Oregon. It is a voluntary association of corporations and individuals engaged in the lumber industry in the Willamette Valley, ' Oregon. The objects of the Operators' Association are "to promote collective bar- gaining with employees ... ; to maintain ... uniform wage sched- ules ...' hours of labor- and working conditions; to promote a high grade of labor relations ... ; and to promote the mutual benefit of employers '.:." The Operators' Association is supported by dues from its 46 members. Its principal full-time administrative officer is its secre- tary-manager, W. C. Ruegnitz, who- was- formerly the president of the 4L. One of the Operators' Association's 46 members is Johnson. John- son introduced certain statistical studies of the West Coast lumber industry-Into evidence: One of these exhibits' shows that from 1928 to 193.7 the West Coast woods, comprising western Oregon,' western The members of the Operators' Association all operate in western Oregon. 900 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Washington, and southern Alaska, originated between 38 per cent and 52 per cent of the total lumber exports from the United States. Other exhibits indicate that in 1935, 1936, and 1937, approximately 80 per cent of the total shipments of West Coast lumber were to States other than Oregon and Washington, or to foreign countries. II. THE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED The 4L was an association; organized in 1917 and incorporated in 1919, made up of employers engaged in logging, lumbering, and allied industries in the Pacific Northwest and California and the employees of such employers. The basic unit of the 4L was the -plant local. Plant locals existed at McGoldrick (4L Local No. 76, District 9)'., Johnson (4L Local No. 50), and Potlatch Forests (4L Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80). The, 4L and each of the afore-mentioned 4L Locals were labor organizations. Each of the 4L Locals admitted to membership the employer and the em- ployees of such employer working at a particular plant or logging camp of the employer. In May 1937, the articles of incorporation of the 4L were amended, As described in more detail below, the organization, known as the 4L became the I. E. U. Substantially `all of the 4L Locals became I. E. U. Locals. At present there are such locals at McGoldrick (I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9), Johnson (I. E. U. Local No. 50), and Potlatch Forests (I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80). The I. E. U. and each of the afore-mentioned I. E. U. Locals are labor organizations. Each of the I. E. U. Locals admits to membership only employees of a single employer working at a particular plant or logging camp of such employer. Local No. 2552 is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor which admits to membership employees of McGoldrick. . Local No. 2584 is a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor which admits to membership employees of Pot- latch Forests at its Clearwater plant in Lewiston, Idaho. Lumber & Sawmill Workers Union, Local No. 2751, herein called Local No. 2751, was a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, which admitted to membership persons em- ployed by Johnson in its woods operations at Camp 12. On about September 15, 1937, Local No. 2751 dissolved, and was replaced by Local No. 63, I. W.. A., another labor organization. Lumber & Sawmill Workers Union, Local No. 2803, herein called Local No. 2803, was a labor organization affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, which admitted to membership persons em- ployed by Johnson at its plant in Toledo, Oregon. In or about McGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY 901 September 1937, Local No. 2803 dissolved , and was replaced by Local No. 2803, I. W. A. In January 1938 Lumber & Sawmill Workers Union, Local No. 2803 was reestablished . Local No. 2803, I. W. A., and the reestablished Local No. 2803 are labor organizations. III. THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES A. Inter f erevee with the formation and administration of the I. E. U. and the I. F. U. Locals 1. The 4L and the 4L Locals a. History and organization of the 4L The 4L was organized in 1917 among the employers and' employees of the logging and lumbering industry in the Pacific Northwest and northern California as a part of the Federal Government 's war pro- gram. While the 4L was under the control of the War Department it was compulsory for employers and employees in the industry to belong to it. The purpose of the organization was to develop unity and understanding among employers and employees in order that the production of war materials would not be curtailed or delayed. At the close of hostilities, when the 4L had some 75 ,000 members, the War Department issued bulletins to the members advising of the withdrawal of its connections from the 4L . The employers and em- ployees then voluntarily; decided to continue the organization, and in December 1918, the 4L was reorganized to handle the industrial relations of its members . In November 1919 the 4L was incorporated under the laws of Oregon as a non-profit corporation with its princi- pal office in Portland , Oregon. It retained a membership of about 50,000 members until depression struck the lumber industry in 1921 and 1922. In April 1937 the 4L had a membership of 12,000. The territory covered by it then, and for many years prior thereto , included the lumber districts of Washington , Oregon, Idaho, Montana, South Dakota, Nevada , and California. The territory was divided into 2 divisions and 12 districts. Within the districts were locals. A local existed at each mill or logging camp where an employer and 15 or more of his employees had joined the 4L. . In April 1937, and for many years prior thereto, the 4L was governed by a board of directors made up equally of employee and employer representatives . The board of directors elected a president and approved the election of a vice president by the employee repre- sentatives on the board of directors. The president was the ad- ministrative head of the 4L. The vice president directed the activi- 283030-41-vol. 19-58 902 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD ties of the 4L field officers or organizers. The 4L constitution also established two divisional wage boards, and a number of "regional going wage boards," each board being composed of an equal number of representatives of employees and employers, which, settled various wage matters. The perpetuation of the existing division of power between employers and employees in the administration of the 4L was assured by a provision of the 4L constitution requiring a two- thirds vote of the board of directors to amend the constitution, and a constitutional prohibition against any amendment which would destroy the equal voting power of employers and employees.9 - The purposes of the 4L, since its inception in 1918, have been, among other things, to maintain an 8-hour day, to secure just wages for employees, to improve working conditions, and to provide means for the adjustment of differences between employees and employers. The 4L was financed by initiation fees and dues. Each employee member paid dues of 25 cents per month, and each employer member paid as his dues 25 cents per month for, each of his employee mem- bers, but not less than a sum equal to 25 cents per month for 56 per cent of the total number of his regular employees.," According to A. D. Chisholm, vice president of the 4L from 1934 to 1937, the most difficult job in the establishment of a 4L local at any particular operation "was to sell the management on the idea of cooperating" with the 4L. Ordinarily a 4L local was not organized until the employer had affiliated with the 4L. The announcement of such affiliation, coupled with the cooperation of the employer and his staff, by furnishing leadership and other aid, was a powerful impetus to the organization of the employees and the establishment of a 4L local. Once a local was established, the combined efforts of the employer and the 4L field officers were devoted to maintaining ar increasing employee membership. Field officers visited locals reg- ularly and aided in the conduct of meetings. They were freely .allowed access to the plants during working hours for the purpose of organization. They also met with employers on such occasions to exchange information and discuss the particular labor problems of each employer. Special attention was given by field officers to oper- ations where a "competitive threat from an "outside" union was pres- ent. In such instances employer cooperation and aid increased. The general procedure for establishing '4L locals, outlined above, continued to be followed after July 5, 1935, the effective date of the Act, and a number of new 4L locals were established thereafter. Members also aided in furthering the organization of the 4L. They were protected in such activities by a provision of the 4L constitu- 9 Article 9, Section 3," of the 4L constitution. 10 McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson all paid dues to the 4L. McGOLDRICK -LUMBER COMPANY 903 tion which prohibited discrimination against them for engaging in .activities to advance the welfare of the 4L.11 b. 4L Local No. 76, District 9 McGoldrick joined the 4L- in 1917, and continued its membership until April 1937. During this period J. P. McGoldrick, the president of McGoldrick, served on the 4L board, of directors, and Milton McGoldrick, the ' vice president of McGoldrick, served on the Re- gional Going Wage Board. J. P. McGoldrick considered other labor organizations as rivals of the 4L, and, therefore, tried to influence other employers to join the 4L. Both of the McGoldricks, the superintendent, and various foremen belonged to the 4L Local No. 76, District 9, and attended its meetings. The foremen and the time- keeper solicited membership in 4L Local 76, District 9, on company property during working hours. At times they promised employees steady work if they joined, while at other times they indicated McGoldrick wanted 100-per dent.. membership. The 4L field officers had the permission of McGoldrick to speak to employees on the job about the 4L. When foremen needed more new employees than they could secure themselves, they hired through the 4L employment office, although it is not clear whether they insisted on all applicants coming through that office. McGoldrick allowed 4L Local 76, Dis- trict 9, the use of the clubhouse, located on company property, for its meetings, and the use of the company bulletin boards to post its notices, some of which were written on McGoldrick letterheads. The foregoing activities were prevalent up to April 1937. c. 4L Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80 Potlatch Forests belonged to the 4L for many years prior to April 1937. During the period of its affiliation with the. 4L, 4L Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, and 80, were established at the various sawmills and logging camps which it maintained. C. L. Billings, the general manager of Potlatch Forests, was a member of the 4L board of directors during 1933 and 1934. He was succeeded by J. J. O'Connell, the manager of the Potlatch plant of Potlatch Forests, who continued in that -position until May 1937. All of these officers and many of the supervisors and foremen belonged to 4L Locals, and at times attended their meetings, which were held on company property. At the Clearwater plant; where 4L Local No. 80 existed, foremen solicited membership during working hours, often indicating to. employees that such membership was necessary if they 11 Article 2 , Section 3 , of the 4L constitution. 904 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD were to have steady employment. Similar activities occurred at the Potlatch plant , where 4L Local No. 67 existed . Substantially all of those activities continued up to April 1937. The woods operations of Potlatch Forests were not organized by the 4L until 1936 . After a strike in the woods operations called by the Industrial Workers of the World, Potlatch Forests con- sented to the establishment of 4L Locals. With the aid of 4L field officers, 4L Locals,,. Nos. 68, 69, 70, 74, 76, 77, and •78 were soon set up at the various logging camps. d. 4L Local No. 50 4L Local No. 50 was established in February 1927, at the sawmill of the Pacific Spruce Corporation . Dean Johnson, now vice presi- dent and general manager of Johnson, called the first meeting of the 4L in Toledo, Oregon, which resulted in the formation of 4L Local No. 50. Johnson now owns the properties formerly belonging to the Pacific Spruce Corporation , and the management of Johnson consists of the personnel which formerly constituted the management of the Pacific Spruce Corporation . After the organization of John- son in 1935, it was a member of the 4L until May 1937, and Dean Johnson was a member of the 4L board of directors for a. period ending in April 1937. Dean Johnson, other officials of Johnson, and numerous foremen belonged to 4L Local No. 50, and attended its meetings , which were held on company property , sometimes dur- ing working hours. Notices of such meetings , and other matters pertaining to 4L Local No. 50, were posted on the company bulletin boards. Foremen often served as officers of 4L Local No. 50. The membership of 4L Local No. 50 was augmented by the hiring of new employees . Many of such persons were asked to sign a membership application card in 4L Local No. 50 at the same time they signed their other employment papers, and supervisors indicated to them that membership in 4L Local No. 50 was a condition of employment. Solicitation on behalf of 4L Local No. 50 took place during working hours by the timekeeper, other employees , and 4L field officers. All of such activities continued until April 1937. e. Conclusions as to the 4L and the 4L Locals at McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson From the foregoing it is apparent that after the withdrawal of the Government, the 4L was an organization formed , sponsored, and fostered by employers as well as employees . Likewise , in the control of the administration of the 4L, extending to all particulars, em- ployers exerted an influence equal to that of the employees . Finally, \IcGOLDRICIi LUMBER COMPANY 905 employers helped to finance and support the 4L by contributing large sums of money to it, in the form of dues. Under the cir- cumstances we find that employers, including McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson, dominated and interfered with the administra- tion of the 4L and contributed financial and other support to it. The 4L Locals, including those existing at McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson, were established at the instance of employers and the 4L, which we have already found to be employer dominated. They were maintained and strengthened, in large measure, by the support of the sane parties. The 4L field officers were of inestimable value to the 4L Locals in solving their individual problems, increas- ing and holding their membership, integrating the activities of the various Locals, and securing the cooperation and aid of employers in accomplishing these ends and in fighting the incursions of "outside" unions. Representatives of the employers belonged to the 4L Locals, attended their meetings, spoke in their councils, and often took an active part in the administration of such Locals. In addition, they aided in the organization of employees into 4L Locals. Finally, employers furnished 4L Locals with material support by affording them the use of meeting places and bulletin boards on company prop- erty. We find that McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson ,dominated and interfered with the administration of the 4L Locals existing at their respective operations and contributed financial and other support to said 4L Local S.12 2. The reorganization of the 4L and the 4L Locals and employer interference with and support of the I. E. U. and the 1. E. U. Locals a. The. reorganization of the 4L and employer interference with and support of the I. E. U. .The move to- reorganize the 4L, which resulted ultimately in the establishment of the I. E. U., was inspired predominantly by em- ployer members of the 4L. While employees, and groups of them, had expressed their desire for a strictly employee organization for sometime past, they had not pressed the matter sufficiently to result in any action being taken. On the other hand, the qualms of some employers as to the legality of the 4L after the Act had been declared constitutional, and the desires of others to withdraw from the 4L, caused a special meeting of the executive committee of the 4L board of directors to be called. "The 4L Locals in question are: 4L Local No. 76, District 9 (McGoldrick ), 4L Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 74, 76, 77, 78 , and 80 (Potlatch Forests ), and 4L Local No. 50 (Johnson). 906 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD On April 27, 1937, the executive committee of the 4L board of directors, composed of ' three employees and representatives of three employers, one of whom was Dean Johnson, met in Portland, Oregon;. to consider the effect on the 4L of the decisions of the Supreme Court upholding the constitutionality of the Act. Also present were W. C. Ruegnitz, A. D. Chisholm, vice president of the 4L, and C. L. Billings, general manager of Potlatch Forests. Ruegnitz opened the meeting by suggesting that only a few minor changes in the 4L would be necessary in order to insure its legality. At this time it was decided to call in King, Johnson's attorney, in order to get a legal opinion on the various questions involved. While waiting for King, the em- ployer representatives expressed the desire to withdraw from the 4L. and leave it an employee organization. When King arrived he stated that in his opinion lumber operations would be declared to be in interstate commerce and that it would be unlawful for employers to belong to or contribute to the 4L. He suggested that the employers withdraw from the 4L and that the employees set up their own organization. During the meeting the directors representing em- ployers discussed the numerous problems which such a course of ac- tion presented, and their views on such --matters were expressed to their coworkers, the employee directors. It was finally decided that an organization limited to employees should be set up, and that a meeting of the board of directors should be called for that purpose. Immediately after the executive committee meeting was over, the employee directors on the committee met, together with Chisholm and Ford, a 4L field officer, in order to formulate a plan which would legalize the 4L and which could be presented to the board of direc- tors when it convened. The group met again on April 27 and on April 28. At the meeting on April 27, King was called in to answer questions. The following morning the work continued. King de- clined to participate further because of his association with Johnson and other lumber operators, but suggested other counsel who-might replace him, including Jaureguy, who was subsequently employed for that purpose. It was decided to alter the 4L rather than to create a, new organization. A copy of the 4L constitution and bylaws was used as a form for the new constitution and bylaws. References to employer contributions and other participation in the 4L were deleted. A proposed constitution and bylaws was completed before the board- of directors met. , The 4L board of directors, composed of nine employees and nine representatives of employers, met in Portland, Oregon, on April 29, 1937, in accordance with the direction of its executive committee. Among the employer representatives. in the group were Dean John- McGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY 907 son, the vice president of Johnson, J. J. O'Connell, the manager of the Potlatch plant of Potlatch Forests, and J. S. Rhodes of the Cas- cade Lumber Company, who was present as an alternate for Board Member J. P. McGoldrick, the president of McGoldrick. Dean Johnson reported that the executive committee recommended that employer members withdraw from the 4L and that the employees take over the organization, including its assets and liabilities, and continue it as a strictly employee organization. The recommendlition of the executive committee was unanimously accepted by the board of directors after King stated that it would be legal for the employee directors to set up a new organization on the authority of the board of directors. The board of directors then voted to terminate the existing contracts between employers and the 4L. Ruegnitz, who had been long recognized as a "company man," resigned from the presi dency of the 4L, and the nine employers represented on the board of directors also resigned from the 4L. All of the employer representa- tives withdrew from the meeting. On April 30 the employee members of the board of directors re- convened. A. D. Chisholm was elected president of the 4L. It was voted that the "4L cease operation and that it be taken over in its entirety, except employer membership, by the I. E. U." At the same time it was decided that 4L employee members, local officers, mem- bers of committees and boards, including the board of directors, should continue in the I. E. U. without any change of status. Chis- holm was elected president of the I. E. U. H. W. Burton, executive secretary of the 4L, and E. N. Wightman, treasurer of the 4L, re- tained their respective positions in the I. E. U. For the remainder of the day and for a good part of the session on May 1, the employee directors worked on a proposed constitution and bylaws prepared by the employee directors on. the executive committee on April 27 and 28, which had been in the hands of all of the directors from the com-. mencement of the meeting. on April 29. After the meeting of the board of directors was concluded, copies of the proposed constitution and bylaws were sent to the officers of the 4L Locals. On May 1 the directors approved a notice and resolution prepared by Attorney Jaureguy in connection with the filing of supplemental, articles of incorporation for the 4L. A further meeting of the board of direc- tors was set for May 17, 1937. On May 17, 1937, a special meeting of the 4L membership was held in Portland, Oregon, at which time the proposed supplementary articles of incorporation of the 4L, which provided for changing the name of the organization-to the- I. E. U. and eliminated all employer participation, were read and discussed. The meeting was attended 908 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD by about 70 members from 23 Locals out of an approximate mem- bership of 12,000 in 78 Locals. Responsibility for the failure of a more substantial and representative group to attend the meeting falls upon the secretary of the 4L, because he failed to send out -notices of the meeting in accordance with the provisions of the Oregon law governing the subject.13 Nevertheless, the members present directed the board of directors to execute and file the supple- mentary articles of incorporation. The board of , directors was further ordered "to prepare and adopt a new constitution and by- laws for carrying out the objectives of the I. E. U. as expressed in the adopted supplementary articles of incorporation.", On the afternoon of May 17, after the membership meeting had adjourned, the I. E. U. board of directors convened with about 50 I. E. U. members also present. In accordance with the instruction of the membership the board of directors executed supplementary .articles of incorporation. The board of directors continued to meet on May 18, 19, and 20, devoting a large part of its time to the con- sideration of the proposed constitution and bylaws which had been prepared at its meeting of May 1. At the concluding session the I. E. U. constitution and bylaws and regulations governing working agreements were. adopted by the board of directors. The various 4L Locals became I. E. U. Locals. The I. E. U. issued formal charters to the I. E. U. Locals during the course of the suc- ceeding month. The 4L was financed by initiation fees and by dues contributed equally by employers and employees. The I. E. U. received dues only from employees and initiation fees only from members who had not previously belonged to the 4L. However, the I. E. U. started its existence with assets of over $21,000, including net assets .of approximately $17,000. At the meeting of the executive com- mittee of the 4L board of directors on April 27 and at the meeting .of the 4L board of directors on April 29, when reorganization of the 4L was first discussed, it was decided between employers and ,employees that the assets of the 4L would be left with the employees for the benefit of the new employee organization. The funds of the I. E. U., which were taken over from the 4L, were used to defray the expenses of reorganizing the 4L and to carry, on the organization work of the I. E. U. During the first 8 months of its existence the I. E. U. expended $11,316 more than its current receipts.14 v Section 25-925, Oregon Code, 1930. Under the , Oregon law the 4L secretary, Burton, should have sent a notice of the meeting to each 4L member . In fact, Burton sent notices to the secretaries of the various 4L Locals and requested them to send the notices to the members. There was no showing that the secretaries of the various Locals complied with Burton's request. 14 On December 31, 1937 , the I. E. U. still had net assets of $5,615.91. McGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY" 909 b. The activities of the Operators' Association Contemporaneously with the execution of the afore-mentioned steps in the reorganization of the 4L,, certain lumber operators belonging to the 4L started to organize themselves into an association which might deal with the organization replacing the 4L. Apparently the idea of an employers' association was first suggested by Dean John- son at a caucus of employers immediately preceding the meeting of the executive committee of the 4L board of directors on April 27. By April 30 a number of employees had heard that an employers' association was to be formed. On May 3, 1937, the Willamette Val- ley Lumber Operators' Association, herein called -the Operators' As- sociation, held its first meeting. The Operators' Association acted in the interest of its employer members. One of its primary pur- poses was "to secure, so far as possible, employer unity with regard to labor standards within the territory served by the organization." 15 Members of the Operators' Association consisted, for the most part, of former 4L employers. Johnson was a member, and Dean John- son was a director and the secretary-treasurer. The other directors were all agents of former 4L employers. On May 5 Chisholm asked the Operators' Association to have a committee present in Eugene, Oregon, on May 8 to confer with a committee from the Willamette Valley 4L Employees' Joint Council, which represented 4L employee members in an area similar to that covered by the Operators' Asso- ciation, for the purpose of negotiating a contract covering the I. E. Ti. Locals in such area. On the morning of May 8 the 4L presented a working agreement to the Operators' Association, which had been prepared by Chisholm, Burton, and 4L field officers, and the Oper- ators' Association gave the 4L representatives a copy of the agree- ment which it proposed. The meeting adjourned until the afternoon, when the proposals were discussed and agreement reached. On May 10 the agreement was put into legal form and signed. Copies of the agreement were sent by the I. E. U. to the I. E. U. Locals, together with a. form, prepared for signature by an individual operator and an I. E. U. Local, stating that it was agreed that the signatories rati- fied the agreement of May 10 and would be bound by its terms. The Operators' Association, which numbered among its members Johnson, but not McGoldrick or Potlatch Forests, concluded the con- tract of May 10 with the I. E. U. notwithstanding the fact that the I. E. U. was not formally organized and the locals in the districts to be covered by the contract had not voted to accept the I. E. U. One of the purposes of both the Operators' Association and the I. E. U. is The territory served by the Operators ' Association was the district west of the Cascade Mountains in Oregon from Oregon City south to California. 910 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD in entering into ' the contract was to furnish method by contract, rather than by membership as formerly in the 4L, whereby employers and employees could meet together. To this end the contract pro-. vides for the establishment of a district wage board composed of equal numbers of employers and employees, to settle disputes arising between the conference committee of an I. E. U. Local and an em- ployer, and for compulsory arbitration of such disputes in the event of disagreement in the district wage board, in much the same manner as provided for in the 4L constitution. The contract also followed the 4L constitution in providing for the check-off, and in providing that the I. E. U. would maintain a local at the operation of each employer, the membership of which would be limited to the em- ployees of that employer, except that, with the consent of the em- ployers, employees of more than - one employer could be combined into a single local. c. The reorganization of 4L Local No. 76, District 9, and McGoldrick's interference with and support of I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9 I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, was the direct outgrowth of 4L Local No. 76, District 9. All steps leading to the change were ac- complished under the aegis of the latter organization. Information concerning the reorganization of the 4L was given out and discussed at the meetings of 4L Local No. 76, District 9. These meetings, like those of the past, were held on company property,16 and were an- nounced by notices appearing on company bulletin boards. One such notice stated that Wolf, the manager of the 4L office in Spokane, had just received a telephone call from the main office of the 4L in Port- land, informing him that the 4L had officially disbanded on April 29. The notice also stated that the employers in withdrawing from the 4L had turned over to the employee directors the assets of the or- ganization, including "a very substantial bank account," and that the employee directors were in session revising the constitution and by- laws "witlr.the. idea in mind of setting up our own.independent.lahor organization or union." The notice went on to praise the "new set-up" and to urge the employees to support it. One of the meet- ings was held in part on company time. At 8 p. m. when the meeting should have adjourned to allow the night shift to return to work, Kennedy, who was the head timekeeper for McGoldrick as well as secretary of 4L Local No. 76, District 9, told the men, "To hell with Elmer Rockstrom [the superintendent]. We will finish 16 After I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, had accomplished a major part of its organi- zation work it started to pay rent to McGoldrick for the use of a meeting place on company property. DIcGOLDRI0K LUMBER OOMP,ANY 911 the meeting." He also told the men they would not lose any "pay if they remained. The men who remained at the meeting for the next 10 6x 15 minutes did not lose any pay. At each of the meetings 4L field officers or other officials Were present and played a prominent -part in the proceedings.17 . Continuity was maintained between 4L" Local No. 76, District 9, .and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, in many ways. The officers and "committeemen of the former organization .retained their positions in the latter organization through the crucial period of reorganization. On June 12, new elections were held, but the president, secretary, and :several conference committeemen were reelected so that I. E. U. .Local No. 76, District 9, was administered by the same persons who had run 4L Local No. 76, District 9, just prior to and during its reorganization. An attempt was made to obtain continuity of mem- bership in the 4L by a ruling of the 4L board of directors on April 30, that all members of the 4L automatically became' members of the .1. E. U. In spite of this I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, tried to sign up former 4L members. However, the continuity of the two organi- zations was recognized by I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, because it only required initiation fees to be paid by those employees who were not previously members of the 4L. Continuity between the two organizations was also maintained by transferring the assets of 4L Local 76, District 9, amounting to over $400, to I. E. U. Local 76, District 9. The assets of 4L Local 76, District 9, were also used to pay the expenses incident to the establishment of I. E. U. Local 76, District 9. In contrast to the passive acceptance of the activities of 4L Local 76, District 9, in the course of its reorganization, McGoldrick's attitude toward Local No. 2552 should be noted. At the 4L meeting of May. 8, when the employees first considered the reorganization of the 4L, they decided to have a further meeting on May 15, at which time speakers from the American Federation of Labor and the Committee for Industrial Organization could present their views, and thus enable the employees intelligently to choose a labor organization. On May 14 announcements of such a meeting to be held in the clubhouse on Saturday afternoon, May 15, were posted on the bulletin board at the clubhouse and also in the planing mill. Less than 2 hours after they were posted, Rockstrom, the superintendent, and Kennedy, the time- keeper and secretary of 4L Local No. 76, District 9, had torn down the notice on the clubhouse bulletin board, and Rockstrom had torn down the notice in the planing mill. . 17 Representatives of Local No. 2552 were present for parts of two of the three meetings concerned with the reorganization of the, 4L, but they did not address the employees. 912 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD At the meeting of 4L Local No. 76, District 9, held in the clubhouse on the evening of May 14, it was announced that the meeting would be held in the clubhouse on the following afternoon. A short time before the meeting was to begin Rockstrom locked the clubhouse in order to prevent the meeting from taking place. Rockstrom took this action ostensibly because no permission had been granted to use the clubhouse. The clubhouse had never been locked to employees on previous occa- sions. In view of Rockstrom's knowledge of the purpose of the meet- ing and the purposes to which the clubhouse had been put in the past, we find that Rockstrom's action was a deliberate interference with the self-organization of the McGoldrick employees and an ex- pression of McGoldrick's preference for the I. E. U. Rockstrom was present during much of the meeting, which was finally held on the railroad tracks 18 near the clubhouse. After May 17, when I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, received its charter, solicitation on its behalf was vigorously undertaken. Ken- nedy, the timekeeper, who retained his position as secretary of the Local, distributed I. E. U. cards to at least half of the employees. Much of the distribution and the solicitation accompanying it took place during working hours. I. E. U. field officers also solicited during working hours. While McGoldrick was allowing I: E. U. solicitation to proceed without restraint, curbs were being placed on the activities of Local No. 2552. On the evening of May 27, O. C. Brasch, the business agent for Local No. 2552, obtained 21 applications for membership in Local No. 2552 while soliciting in the McGoldrick clubhouse. McGoldrick learned of this activity, and on the following day when Brasch re- turned to the plant to continue his organization work he was denied admittance by Rockstrom and Scriver, a special policeman and watch= man for McGoldrick. McGoldrick also supported I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, by requiring prospective employees to secure clearance slips from the I. E. U. employment service, and thereby requiring membership in I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, as a condition of employment. Our findings on this matter are-set forth in Section III-B-1, below. After gaining a majority, and proving the same to the satisfaction of McGoldrick, I. T. U. Local No. 76, District 9, entered into a temporary working agreement with McGoldrick. The agreement, effective from July 1 through July 31, recognized I. E. U. Local 76, as the exclusive bargaining agent of the McGoldrick employees, froze the existing wage rates, provided for a 40-hour workweek, and provided for meetings between the conference committee and man- agement in accordance with the I. E. U. constitution. On Septem- 18 The railroad tracks are not on McGoldrick property. McGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY 913 ber 20, after a number of conferences between representatives of I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, and McGoldrick, a final agreement was entered into, which, in addition to the matters contained in the temporary agreement, provided for overtime regulations, seniority, check-off, arbitration, etc. .d. The reorganization of the 4L Locals at Potlatch Forests and Potlatch Forests' interference with and support of the I. E. U. Locals replacing them I. E. U. Local No. 80 was established as a result of the reorganiza- tion of 4L Local No. 80 at the Clearwater plant of Potlatch Forests. While the idea of reorganizing 4L Local No. 80 originated with a small group of its officers, including Swartz, a foreman, and Evenden, the employment manager, no action was taken in this direction until the 4L board of directors voted to reorganize the 4L in the manner set forth above. The reorganization was carried out at meetings-of 4L Local No. 80 which were attended by 4L field officers and of- ficials who participated extensively in the meetings. Employees attended the principal reorganization meetings at the behest of fore- men and supervisors of Potlatch Forests. Operations at the Clear- water plant were shut down to enable employees to attend these meetings. At the first of the meetings, on May 8, Swartz, who was a member of the executive committee of the 4L board of directors, explained to the employees what had taken place at the meeting of the executive committee and the meeting of the 4L board of directors in Portland. Swartz urged the employees to support the I. E. U., indicating that he had talked to Billings, general manager of Pot- latch Forests, and had been assured that the men would get a contract when they approved the new constitution and bylaws. When questioned about an increase in wages the 4L was trying to obtain, Swartz replied that the matter had been turned over to the I. E. U. and that the only way to get the increase was to support the I. E. U. I. E. U. membership application cards were distributed to the em- ployees at this meeting. At a second meeting on May 15 officers of I. E. U. Local No. 80 were elected. I. E. U. Local No. 80 maintained its identity with 4L Local No. 80 in many ways. The officers of 4L Local No. 80 were the leaders in the' formation of I. E. U. Local No. 80. The ruling of the 4L board of directors, to the effect that 4L members automatically be- come I. E. U. members, was used. in the campaign of I. E. U. Local No: 80 to retain' within the ranks of its membership the former members of 4L Local No. 80. And, while all persons becoming members of I. E. U. Local No. 80 had to sign membership applica- tion'cards; they were not iequired to pay an initiation fee if they had 914 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL. LABOR RELATIONS BOARD previously belonged to 4L Local No. 80. . Financially, I. E. U: Local. No. 80 was largely aided by its predecessor, 4L, Local No. 80. . Not only did 4L Local No. 80 stand the expense incident to the establish- ment of I. E. U. Local No. 80, but it turned over to I. E. U. Local No. 80 a general fund in excess of $250 and a separate fund of $1,000. As a result of solicitation immediately preceding the establish- ment of I. E. U. Local No. 80 and for a short period thereafter, .a. .majority of the employees signed membership application cards in I. E. U. Local No. 80. Much of the solicitation took place during working hours. Participants included the officers and leaders of I. E. U. Local No. 80, I. E. U. field officers, and foremen. While Pot- latch Forests instructed its foremen, as early as May 1937, not to solicit for any union and not to express their personal opinions as to the relative merits of unions, it is nevertheless clear that its foremen. solicited for I. E. U. Local No. 80. Perhaps in recognition of the delinquencies of its foremen in this respect, Potlatch Forests posted a notice on May 18 stating that such instructions had been giveli to its foremen, that such actions would not be permitted, and that it wished to repudiate any coercive statements made by its supervisors. The notice came too late, however, to remedy the prior activities of Potlatch Forests' supervisors, for on May 20 I. E. U. Local No. 80 already represented a majority of the employees. Having obtained a majority, which was demonstrated to' Potlatch Forests by means of an affidavit as to the number of signed card's possessed by it, I. E. U. Local No. 80 sought to obtain a temporary working agreement with Potlatch Forests. Such an agreement, which was submitted by Potlatch Forests, was signed by representa- tives of I. E. U. Local No. 80 on May 21. The agreement granted I. E. U. Local No. 80 recognition as the exclusive bargaining agent for the employees at the Clearwater plant. In August, after a num- ber of conferences between representatives of ' I. E. U. ' Local No. 80 and Potlatch Forests, a permanent agreement was. signed by the parties. 19 In addition to solicitation, other activities of I. E. U. Local No. 80 were carried on at the plant. Departmental meetings were held during lunch hours in May 1937, to elect members of the conference committee of I. E. U. Local No. 80. Arthur Smith, secretary of I. E. U. Local No. 80, typed most of the correspondence of I. E. U. Local No. 80 in his office at the plant. He used the office equipment for such work. Smith and Les Tremblay, vice chairman of I. E. U. Local. No. 80, -both handled work in connection with the loan fund 1U The agreement was permanent in the sense that the parties had fully discussed all controversial points. It was terminable on March.l, 1938, by either party giving notice 30 days prior thereto. Failure to terminate automatically 'left the contract in force for another 6-month period. McGOLDRTCK L'UMBER COMPANY 915 of I. E. U. Local No. 80 during working hours. Tremblay finally stopped at the request of his foreman. The treatment accorded to I. E. U. Local No. 80 by Potlatch Forests is in sharp contrast to its attitude toward Local No. 2584. Instead of giving active aid, foremen disparaged the American Feder- ation of Labor, with which Local No. 2584 was affiliated. 'George Hudson, the head timekeeper at the Clearwater plant, stationed him- self outside of the hall where Local No. 2584 held its meetings in such a way that he could observe all of the employees attending the meetings. In the fall of 1937, a number of employees withdrew from I. E. U. Local No. 80 and joined Local No. 2584. A list signed by employees withdrawing from I. E. U. Local No. 80 was furnished to Leuschel, the manager of the Clearwater plant, so that dues for I. E. U. Local No. 80 would no longer be checked off from their pay. Leuschel re- fused to concede that the signatures • were genuine, , but required Hudson, the timekeeper, to check with each individual employee be- fore discontinuing the deduction of dues although no such precaution had been deemed necessary when the authorizations to deduct dues had been presented to Potlatch Forests. At the Potlatch plant of Potlatch Forests, I. E. U. Local No. .67 was established as a result of the reorganization of 4L Local No. 67. Interest in the reorganization of 4L Local No. 67, which admitted to membership employees of Potlatch Forests working at the Pot- latch plant in Potlatch, Idaho, was first evidenced when it sent a dele- gation to the meeting of 4L Local No. 80 held in Lewiston on May 8. Thereafter, the reorganization was effected at meetings of 4L Local No. 67 announced by notices posted on company bulletin boards and held on company property. Various 4L field officers at- tended the meetings and addressed the employees. Swartz, a fore- nla.n at the Clearwater plant, also -spoke. Solicitation on behalf of the newly established I. E. U. 'Local No. 67 was engaged in exten- sively during working hours by the leaders. of I. E. U. Local No. 67 and other interested employees. On May 14, I. E. U. Local No. 67, claiming to represent a ma- jority of the employees at the Potlatch plant, requested that Potlatch Forests recognize it as the exclusive bargaining agent for such em- ployees. On the same day Potlatch Forests presented a temporary agreement to I. E. U. Local No. 67, granting such recognition and a 5-cent per hour, wage increase, which was • signed by the latter's representatives. On "September 14, a final agreement: was' signed by I. E. U. Local No. 67 and Potlatch Forests which was substan- tially the same as the agreement between I. E. U. Local No. 80 and Potlatch Forests. 916 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD I. E. U. Local No. 67 was much the same as 4L Local No. 67.. The officers of the old organization retained their positions in the new. Members of the old organization were not required to pay initiation fees upon joining the new. Announcements by I. E. U. Local No. 67 were posted on the company bulletin boards as notices of 4L Local No. 67 were in the past. Field officers who formerly attended meetings of 4L Local No. 67 now attended meetings of I. E. U. Local No. 67. Dues for the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 67 were deducted from I. E. U. members' pay checks just as dues for the 4L 'and 4L Local No. 67 had been deducted from 4L members' pay checks in the past. I. E. U. Local No. 67 voted to allow such super- visors as did not have the power to hire or discharge to join the organization, and many of them did so.20 The record does not disclose the various events which took place in the woods operations of Potlatch Forests which resulted in the re- organization, of the existing 4L Locals into I. E. U. Locals. It is clear, however, that such reorganization took place and that 4L and I. E. U. field officers aided and influenced employees during the trans- ition. The organizational appeal used by the I. E. U. field officers was a promise of a raise when the I. E. U. got a majority. Tom Kinney, the assistant manager of Potlatch Forests in charge of the woods operations, was present at many of the reorganization meet- ings of the woods Locals. During the period of reorganization he requested the'L E. U. to send in field officers, indicating the particu- lar operations where they were needed, and sometimes suggesting the :names of the field officer best suited for a particular job.. He frequently conferred with the field officers on organizational matters, and furnished them transportation. Nogle, the superintendent of the Potlatch logging operations at Bovill, Idaho, engaged in similar activities. By May 25, Potlatch Forests had entered into temporary working agreements with I. E. U. Locals Nos. 68, 69, and 70,21 which provided for wage increases, and by September 11, 1937, it had en- tered into permanent agreements identical in terms, with I. E. U. Locals Nos. 68, 69, 70,22 73, and 78. No agreement was signed with I. E. U. Local No. 72, as it did not represent a majority of the employees in Camp 33, Bovill, Idaho.. 20 Supervisors with power to hire or discharge at the Potlatch plant, which employed about 550 employees, we-e 4 in number: J. J. O'Connell, manager; B. F. Swafford, sawmill superintendent ; L. H. Young, power and maintenance superintendent ; and P. H. Tobin, shipping superintendent. 21 The agreement signed by I. E. U. Local No. 70 was made between Potlatch Forests and the "I. E. U." and purports to cover "employees of the Clearwater woods operations at Headquarters, Idaho." I. It. U. Locals Nos. 70, 74, 75, 76, and 77 are established at various camps of the Clearwater woods operations-at Headquarters, Idaho. 22 See footnote 19, supra. McGOLDRIC'K LUMBER ()OMPANY 917 At the Rutledge plant of Potlatch Forests, located in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, the reorganization of 4L Local No. 26 into I. E. U. Local No. 26 was apparently unsuccessful. A meeting of 4L Local No. 26 was held on May 7, at which 4L Field Officer Jack Ziemer was present to push reorganization. However, a further meeting was held and the following notice posted : At a special meeting called May 11, by the employees of the Potlatch 23 plant, it was the consensus of opinion that the I. E. U: could not legislate members into their organization because of previous affiliation with the 4L. Any person can join the I. E. U. by making personal application. Motion was made and carried that we, the employees as a group, do not affiliate with the I. E. U. At the time of the hearing there was no I. E. U. local at the Rutledge plant of Potlatch Forests, although I. E. U. field officers continued their organization work there after May 11. e. The reorganization of 4L Local No. 50 and Johnson's interference with and support of I. E. U. Local No. 50 I. E. U. Local No. 50 was established as a result of the reorganiza- tion of 4L Local No. 50 at Johnson's mill in Toledo, Oregon. In order to understand the events surrounding this reorganization and the formation and functioning of I. E. U. Local No. 50, it is helpful to examine Johnson's attitude toward labor organizations. We shall, therefore, refer to some of the incidents in the relations between Johnson and the American Federation of Labor, herein called the A. F. of L., and its affiliates, prior to the reorganization of the.4L. In the spring of 1935 large numbers of organizers and pickets representing the A. F. of L. were expected to come to Toledo to "close down" the Johnson mill and thus further a strike being con- ducted in Portland. At this time Johnson cooperated with certain municipal authorities and prominent citizens of Toledo in forming. a group of men to keep the organizers and pickets out of town. Johnson called a meeting of its employees which was addressed by Dean Johnson, the vice president of Johnson and the general man- ager of the Toledo plant, Judge Gaither, and Sheriff McElwain. Dean Johnson spoke against the A. F. of L., McElwain said he would keep the organizers out, and Gaither promised to do "all that he could for the employees." Thereafter, a squad of deputies was or- ganized to watch the roads and to drive out the organizers if .neces- 23 "Potlatch" as used in this notice evidently refers to the company. The "Potlatch plant" at Coeur d'Alene is referred to herein as the Rutledge plant of Potlatch Forests. 2130:0-41-vol. 19--59 918 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD sary. Johnson's foremen and supervisors aided in organizing the squad, which contained many of Johnson's employees . They also organized groups of "husky" men in the mill who were to rush out when the siren blew and defend the mill from the invaders. After the threat from A. F. of L. pickets and organizers was over each employee of Johnson received a bonus. In the spring of 1936 a similar scare arose , and Johnson conducted itself as it had in 1935. From December 1935 until April 1936, Johnson engaged in a citm- paign to discredit the A. F. of L . and to discourage its employees from organizing an A. F . of L. local at Camps 1 and 12, where Johnson carried on its woods operations . Remarks, clearly indicat- ing these objects, were addressed to the employees , both individually and in group meetings, by Dean Johnson, the superintendent of the woods operations , and various foremen. For example , Dean Johnson informed the employees that he was opposed to the A. F. of L., that the A. F. of L. was only interested in collecting dues and was not concerned with the welfare of its members , that its leadership was communistic, that the employees should withdraw from the A. F. of L., and that he would do his utmost to keep it out of Johnson's woods operations . Jacoby, the logging superintendent, threatened the', employees with the loss of their jobs if they joined the A. F. of L:, but indicated that he would be pleased if the men made the A. F. of L. meetings a failure by refusing to attend them. Jensen , a fore- man in the woods, told ' the employees that the A . F. of L. would cause labor trouble and would be expensive. He suggested that the 4L would obviate these disadvantages . Initially these remarks were coupled with statements praising the 4L, and speeches by 4L field officers offering to establish a 4L local and indicating that Johnson had approved such action. Later, upon the failure of the 4L to gain a foothold , an independent union limited to the woods employees of Johnson was formed. This organization , called the C. D. Johnson Lumber Company Employees Association , was formed by employees with the assistance and express approval of the woods supei fintendeht and some of the foremen. After some discussion with Dean Johnson as to the acceptability of the organization , Dean Johnson submitted to the employees , in writing, a constitution and temporary working agreement. In these documents the name of the organization was. changed to Associated Loggers of C. D. Johnson Lumber Corpora- tion. The employees voted to accept the constitution and working agreement, but immediately thereafter the organization ceased func- tioning because the employees , recognizing that their organization was the creation of Johnson , lost interest in il.. McGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY 919 In view of the foregoing, the conclusion is inescapable that Johnson was completely and unalterably opposed to the A. F. of L. and to the establishment of one of its locals in the Johnson woods opera- tions. It is also apparent that Johnson, in order to attain its desires, was willing not only to attack, discredit, and discourage membership in the A. F. of L., but was also willing to, and actually did, support and encourage membership in the 4L and other "independent" labor organizations of its employees. While Johnson was not successful in establishing a 4L local in its woods operations, 4L Local No. 50 was established at its sawmill in Toledo, as described above. In May 1937, 4L Local No. 50 was re- organized and I. E. U. Local No. 50 was formed. The change was effected under the guidance of the officers of 4L. Such meetings of the employees as were held, were held under the auspices of 4L Local No. 50. The meetings were announced by notices posted on company bulletin boards, and were held on company property. They were attended by foremen and addressed by 4L field officers. At the first of these meetings, on April 30, Dean Johnson addressed the em- ployees. He told them that Johnson and other employers were with- drawing from the 4L; that he had just returned from Portland where the employees were reorganizing the 4L; that the employers were leaving the funds contributed to the 4L so that there would be plenty of money for the new organization ; that they would be approached by a number of labor organizations asking them to join, but that they should not be in a hurry but should wait until the successor to the 4L was organized, and then whatever union they joined, they should join it in a body. This was the first information about the reorgan- ization of the 4L that most of the employees had received. Other meetings followed at intervals. Shortly after the meeting of May 12, Hawkins received a charter for I. E. U. Local No. 50 from I. E. U. headquarters. On May 25 the first regular meeting of I. E. U. Local No. 50 was held in the American Legion Hall in Toledo. Further impetus to the reorganization of the 4L was furnished by Johnson on May 12. On that afternoon, just a few hours before Dean Johnson was called into a meeting of 4L Local No. 50 to sign a con- tract with I. E. U. Local No. 50, Ralph King, attorney for Johnson, addressed a meeting of the employees on company property during working hours. Dean Johnson introduced King as an authority on the Act who had recently made a number of talks in different cities of the State to explain its purposes. He failed to inform the em- ployees that King was Johnson's attorney. King gave a short talk,24 two-thirds of which was an exposition of Sections 7, 8 (2), Q' The stenographic transcript of the talk which was made by King's stenographer contains about 1,500 words. 920 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD and 9 of the Act, none of which dealt with Section 8 (1), (3), (4), or (5), and one-third of which was an interpretation of the language of Section 2 (5) of the Act which defines a "labor organization," to mean "any organization of any kind, or any agency or employee rep- resentation committee or plan . . ." King's point in the latter connection, that the Act required an employer to recognize the repre- sentative of his employees whether it was a "new union or an old union" and "whether it is a new plant association of your own, whether it is a new union "with locals in other localities, or whether it is an old union," was driven home to the employees by constant repetition. Objectively, the language of the Act which King dealt with in greatest detail was not of primary significance to the employees, nor was the meaning of the language obscure. By these statements, King implied, without specifically naming it, that the I. E. U., "a new union" and one "with locals in other locali- ties," was a valid collective bargaining agency under the Act. His emphasis of this idea in a speech sponsored by Johnson, at a time when the only competing union, the A. F. of L., was contending that the I. E. U. was proscribed by the Act as a company-dominated or- ganization, could only be understood by his hearers as indicating Johnson's preference for the I. E. U.25 We find that Johnson, through the talk of its agent, King, encouraged membership in the I. E. U. and aided in its establishment. Johnson also furthered the establishment of I. E. U. Local No. 50 by entering into a contract with it on May 12. Dean Johnson signed the contract at a meeting of 4L Local No. 50 without having previ- ously conducted any negotiations with 4L Local No. 50, and at a time when I. E. U. Local No. 50 was not yet in existence. ' Continuity was maintained between 4L Local No. 50 and I. E. U. Local No. 50 in a variety of ways. The fact that the latter organiza- tion resulted from the reorganization of the former was, of course, the factor most clearly indicating the close connection between the two. Certain other factors were instrumental in'identifying I. E. U. Local No. 50 with 4L Local No. 50. Former members of 4L Local No. 50 were not required to pay an initiation fee when they became members of I. E. U. Local No. 50. In addition employees were con- stantly being told by those organizing for I. E. U. Local No. 50, and the 4L board of directors had so ruled, that 4L members automati- cally became members of the I. E. U. Foremen belonged to I. E. U. 25 See Matter of Swift d Company, a Corporation and Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, Local No. 641, and United Packing House Workers J.ocal Industrial Union No. 300, 7 N. L. R . B. 269. McGOLDBICK LUMBER COMPANY 921 Local No. 50 just as they had belonged to 4L Local No. 50. The 4L field officers who aided 4L Local No. 50 later served as I. E. U. field officers, attending the meetings of I. E. U. Local No. 50 and helping its officers. The officers and committeemen of I. E. U. Local No. 50 for the first 4 or 5 months of its existence were the officers and com- mitteemen of 4L Local No. 50 at the time the reorganization was effected. The assets of 4L Local No. 50, totaling close to $4,000, and including $1,000 in cash and a building fund of $1,700, were taken over by I. E. U. Local No. 50 as a result of the reorganization. Finally, the machinery for the settlement of disputes under the 4L was substantially preserved by I. E. U. Local No. 50. Soon after it was decided to reorganize the 4L into the I. E. U. an intensive campaign was started at Toledo to enroll the employees of Johnson in the ranks of I. E. U. Local No. 50. For the first few weeks thereafter the officers. of 4L Local No. 50 and the 4L field officers played a dominant role in the campaign. Their solicitation of employees was accomplished largely on the mill property during working hours. They continued their activities later in the capacity of officers of I. E. U. Local No. 50 and I. E. U. field officers. Haw- kins, the timekeeper and secretary of I. E. U. Local No. 50, sometimes handed I. E. U. membership application cards to employees when they first started to work for Johnson. Copies of the I. E. U. con- stitution were also distributed by Hawkins from his office. From the start I. E. U. Local No. 50 received considerable support from various foremen and supervisors of Johnson. The support afforded by fore- men and supervisors, many of whom wore I. E. U. buttons while at work, took the form of requests to employees to join I. E. U. Local No. 50 and the distribution of I. E. U. membership application cards for them to sign. Such requests were usually made during working hours, and were often accompanied by expressions of opposition to the A. F. of L. and threats of job insecurity for employees who did not join I. E. U. Local No. 50. In a number of instances Johnson carried these threats into effect as we note in Section III-B-3, below. Johnson afforded support to I. E. U. Local No. 50 in many other ways. I. E. U. membership application cards were available to employees on the desks of many of the foremen. One of the em- ployees conducting a vote on the 40-hour week for I. E. U. Local No. 50 was allowed time off with pay. I. E. U. Local No. 50 used the Johnson bulletin boards, employee lists, and office equipment. I. E. U. membership cards were distributed with pay checks, and loans made by I. E. U. Local No. 50 were collected by pay-roll deductions. 922 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD 3. Conclusions with respect to the I. E. U. and the I . E. U. Locals at McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson We have already found that employers , including McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests , and Johnson , dominated and interfered with the formation and administration of the 4L and contributed financial and other support to it. In April 1937 , after the constitutionality of the Act had been upheld , some employer members feared that the. 4L was invalid and so set about to change it... - As a result the 4L was reorganized, and the I. E. U. established . This change was effected with the approval of the employer representatives on the 4L board of directors after they had seen a copy of the proposed constitution of the new organization and after they had discussed and advised on many of the problems confronting the new organi- zation. The employee members who participated with the employers in the reorganization were directors of the employer-dominated 4L. Assisting also in the change were the paid members of the adminis- trative staff of the 4L. The I. E. U. was not a new corporation but a continuation of the 4L. Its constitution was drawn up by employee directors of the 4L, and was modeled after and substantially similar to that of the 4L. Its directors , administrative staff , and field officers were taken over almost without exception from the 4L . Through the retention of the 4L field officers, the I . E. U. maintained the good will the 4L possessed in its relations with employers . Its locals, their members , officers, and committees , were for the most part taken over from the 4L "without any change of status." The only important parts of the 4L structure not found in the I. E. U. were provisions ( 1) allowing employers to become members of the organization and (2 ) requiring employers to contribute dues equally with employees . It should be noted first that elimination of these features was at the suggestion of employers and was approved for the I. E. U. by the board of directors of the employer- dominated 4L. So far as a. large number of employers , including Johnson, are concerned, the withdrawal of employers from the I. E. U. lost most of its significance because a large group of em- ployer members of the 4L immediately after withdrawing from the 4L organized the Operators' Association , which entered into a con- tract with the I . E. U. in order to create machinery similar to-that of the 4L for collective bargaining and the settlement of disputes. The second major change in the I. E. U., namely , the elimination of employer contributions, is also of little significance because the I. E. U. took over all of the assets of the employer-dominated 4L when the reorganization was effected . Employer contributions were IIcGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY, 923 responsible for 50 per cent of the assets of the 4L, and, therefore, an equal percentage of the original assets of the I. E. U. As the I. E. U. spent, during the first 8 months of its existence, over $11,000 more than its current income, or 66 per cent of the net assets it had when established, it is apparent that it could not have carried on its activities without the aid of 4L funds, and more particularly, without the aid of the 4L funds contributed by employers. In addition to the foregoing, there is..a mass of evidence in the record, which we will summarize below, showing domination and interference with the formation and administration of the I. E. U. Locals involved in this proceeding and the contribution of support to them by McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson. We will accord weight to such evidence in determining the relationship of McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson to the I. E. U. It is unnecessary to decide at this time whether an employer- dominated labor organization, such as the 4L, may be reorganized or altered in such manner as to free itself of the taint of employer domination. It is clear that under the circumstances of this case that has not been accomplished. In brief, the reorganization of the 4L was instigated by employer members of the 4L and was carried out, with their consideration and approval, by the directors, officers, and staff of the employer-dominated 4L. The officers, directors, field officers, committees, constitution, bylaws, and general method of func- tioning of the 4L survived in the I. E. U. The elimination of em- ployers and their contributions from the I. E. U. were counteracted in large measure by the contract entered into between the Operators' Association and the I. E. U. and by the employer contributions to the 4L which were carried over to the I. E. U. We find that employers, including McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson, have dominated and interfered with the formation and administration of the I. E. U. and have contributed financial and other support to it, and have thereby interfered with, restrained, and coerced their employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section :7 of the Act. The I. E. U. Locals, including those at McGoldrick'27 Potlatch Forests,28 and Johnson'29 are each a part of the employer-dominated I. E. U. Each of the Locals is governed by the constitution and bylaws of the I. E. U. Each of the Locals is aided and supported in its activities by the I. E. U. field officers and officials. Each of the Locals received extensive information from I. E. U. headquarters 211. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9. =a I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 79, '75, 76, 77, 78, and 80. 11 I. E. U. Local No. 50. 924 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD concerning labor matters in the' Pacific Northwest. Each of the Locals receives the 'benefits of its association with other Locals through the coordination of the activities of all of the Locals by the I. E. U. On the other hand, the Locals, through their members, contribute dues to the I. E. U. and carry on negotiations with the 'employers, in large measure, through the I. E. U. The interde- pendence-of the I. E. U. and its Locals makes it evident that together they form an integrated labor organization. Having - found that the I. E. U. is employer dominated we find that each of its com- ponent parts , the I . E. U. Locals, is also employer dominated. This 'means*-that as far as the I. E. U. Locals at the operations of McGold- rick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson are concerned , they are domi- nated by said companies, for each of said companies shares with the other employers who were previously members of the 4L the domination exercised by all of them over the I. E. U. Locals. This conclusion is independently justified as to the I. E. U. Locals at McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson by an abundance of evidence showing the domination and interference with the formation or administration of said Locals and the contribution of support to them by McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson. We have already found that the 4L Locals involved in this pro- ceeding were dominated by McGoldrick , Potlatch Forests , and John- son.30 The I . E. U. Locals here involved were established as a result of the reorganization of those 4L Locals.31 ThQ reorganization of those 4L .Locals into I. E. U. Locals was accomplished with the support of McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson. The I. E. U. Locals established were substantially similar to the 4L Locals, being, for all practical purposes , continuations of the 4L Locals under different names. Under the circumstances we cannot find that the taint of employer domination attaching to the 4L Locals was dissipated by the reorganization of said Locals into I. E. U. Locals. Rather, we are convinced that the employers' support in the reor- ganization of the employer -dominated 4L Locals, coupled with the retention of the officers and funds of the 4L Locals in the I. E. U. Locals, restrained employees in the exercise of their right of self- organization and rendered the I . E. U. Locals incapable of serving as genuine collective bargaining agencies as contemplated by the Act. After the I. E. U. Locals under consideration were established, McGoldrick , Potlatch Forests, and Johnson continued to afford them support, and at the same time, in many instances , to maintain an antagonistic attitude toward competing labor organizations. '° See p . 903, supra. 31 Except I. E. U. Locals Nos. 73 and 76 located in the woods operations of Potlach Forests which were not preceded by 4L Locals. McGOLDRIC'K LUMBER COMPANY 925 We find that McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson dominated and interfered with the formation and administration of the I. E. U. Locals existing at their respective operations and contributed support to said I. E. U. Locals'32 and have thereby interfered with, restrained, and coerced their employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. 4. Conclusions with respect to the activities of the Operators' Association, and Johnson, as a member thereof The Operators' Association entered into contractual relations with the I. E. U. at a time when the I. E. U. was not formally organized. The persons negotiating the contract for the I. E. U. were the officials of the employer-dominated 4L. The contract was intended to, and did, perpetuate the machinery existing under the 4L for carrying on collective bargaining and handling grievances. As we have found that the I. E. U. was employer dominated it is apparent that the employees had no free choice as to whether or not they desired to join. Many of them must have joined because of their fear of engendering the displeasure of their employer by refusing to accept the organiza- tion it favored. However, not only were employees coerced into join- ing the I. E. U., but, because of the existence of the contract entered into between the Operators' Association and the I. E. U., the manner in which they could handle grievances and carry on collective bar- gaining through the I. E. U. was already prescribed for them. It is readily apparent that the Operators' Association, by concluding the contract of May 10, prior to the establishment of the I. E. U., inter- fered with the administration of the I. E. U. Moreover, the execu- tion of the contract by the Operators' Association affording recogni- tion and other rights to the I. E. U. under the circumstances here present constituted a contribution of support to the I. E. U. We find that the Operators' Association, by entering into such contract, inter- fered with the administration of the I. E. U. and contributed support to it. We further find that by such acts the Operators' Association interfered with the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act to the employees of its members.33 The Operators' Association acted on behalf of its member, Johnson, among others, in the execution of the contract with the I. E. U. on May 10. We find that Johnson, by .acting through the Operators' Association in entering into such contract, interfered with the admin- 82 The I . E. U. Locals referred to are : I. E. U. Local No. 76 , District 9 (McGoldrick), I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69 , 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77 , 78, and 80 ( Potlatch Forests), and I . E. U. Local No . 50 (Johnson). 33 See Matter of Williams Coal Co. and United Mine Workers of America, District No. 23; Matter of The Operators Association and United Mine Workers of America . District No. 23, 11 N. L. It. B. 579. 926 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD istration of the I. E. U. and contributed support to it, and has thereby interfered with the exercise of the rights of its employees guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act.34 B. Discrimination in regard' to hire or tenure of employment or terms or conditions of employment 1. Discrimination by McGoldrick The amended complaint against McGoldrick alleged that since about May 1, 1937, McGoldrick has required of its employees mem- bership in the I. E. U. as a condition precedent to employment in order to encourage membership in the I. E. U. and discourage mem- bership in Local-No. 2552. McGoldrick denied this allegation. The regular reports of the I. E. U. field officers in Spokane to the I. E. U. headquarters in Portland are enlightening on the ques- tion of whether McGoldrick required membership in the I. E. U. as a condition of employment: On June 3, 1937, one sffdli report- stated : We now have an understanding that all new employees at the McGoldrick plant will clear through this office. In the past they have not dealt with us. However, the understanding reached this morning is that even if foremen hire men direct, such men must be O. K.'d by the I. E. U. employment office. A further report on June 5 said : I have seven of the men . . . for the McGoldrick plant Tuesday and had each one of them sign up before I gave them their slip so we have seven more for Tuesday. Also Kennedy [McGoldrick timekeeper and secretary of I. E. U. Local No. 50] won out about the two men the shipping foreman put on Friday he had to let one of them go this morning and the other one had to go at noon today. On June 11 a report stated : The employment situation is working out fine here . . . McGold- rick's are now hiring exclusively through this office, and every man signs up before he goes to work. The I. E. U. and McGoldrick denied that they had reached an agreement or understanding whereby McGoldrick would hire new employees through the I. E. U. employment office in Spokane. Such a denial was made by McKay, a former McGoldrick employee who became an I. E. U. field officer late in May 1937, and by. Gazette, the sawmill foreman for McGoldrick. Milton McGoldrick, the vice president of McGoldrick, who was in charge of labor relations, first 84 Ibid. i\IcGOLDRICK LUMBER CO MPANY 927 testified that there was no such agreement, but later stated that he did not recall such an agreement, but that it might have been made without his knowledge. Kennedy testified that he did not recall the occasion when the shipping foreman was required to discharge two men at his behest, as is indicated in the report of June 5 quoted above. Rockstrom, the superintendent for McGoldrick, who was responsible only to Milton McGoldrick, and J. G. Wolf, who was in charge of the I. E. U. employment office in Spokane, did not testify on this issue. On the other hand, Kennedy testified that he and. the I. E. U. field officers tried to get McGoldrick's foremen to hire through the I. E. U. employment office. Wendell Reid, an employee of McGold- rick, testified that he had been told by A. J. Anderson, another employee, that when Anderson came to McGoldrick looking for work, Gazette, the sawmill foreman, told him that all help was hired through the I. E. U. employment service, and that he had gone there, signed up in the I. E. U., and then started to work for McGoldrick. Reid also testified that he had been told by John Solinsky, another new employee, that Solinsky had had to join the I. E. U. at the I. E. U. employment service in Spokane before going to work for McGoldrick. Eugene Gratton testified that Jim Leon, the yard foreman at McGoldrick, told him to get a clearance slip from the I. E. U. employment office and then he could go to work. Gratton joined the I. E. U. at the same time that he obtained such a clearance slip. Subsequently, he started to work for McGoldrick. Reuben Morris testified that on June 8 he asked Gazette for a job, and Gazette told him, "I can't hire you, but if you go to the 4L office- the I. E. U. now-they will give you a clearance card to go to work at McGoldrick's." Neither Keon nor Gazette denied any of the foregoing statements. In fact, Gazette testified that early in June 1937, when he put on another sawmill crew of nine men, J. G. Wolf, the head of the I. E. U. office in Spokane, asked him to "give their men a trial," and that he (Gazette) later hired three to five men from the I. E. U. employment office. Gazette qualified this testimony by stating further that he did not hire all of the new men through the I. E. U. office, that he had no agreement to hire through the I. E. U. office, and that the hiring of some of the men through the I. E. U., was a practice carried over from 4L days. A report from the I. E. U. employment office in Spokane on June 7 informed the I. E. U. office in Portland that : At McGoldrick plant we have 170 members now and they are still coming in and I have 11 cards signed up in the office of men that we hired to go to work tomorrow so you see we are quietly closing in on these birds. 928 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD I. E. U. clearance slips, or introduction slips, for 11 employees that were hired by McGoldrick during the month of June 1937 were introduced into evidence. Most of the employees securing such clear- ance slips had not previously registered for employment with the I. E. U. employment office. Other clearance slips were issued by the I. E. U. employment service, but were destroyed prior to the hearing. We find that in June 1937, and thereafter, McGoldrick refused to hire employees directly, but required them to secure clearance slips from the I. E. U. employment office in Spokane before putting them to work. Waldon McKay, an I. E. U. field officer who worked in the I. E. U. employment office in Spokane, testified that after the I. E. U. employment service secured a job for a man it requested him to sign an I. E. U. membership application card, but- that such request was never made until after the man had been given his clearance slip. The reports of the I. E. U. field officers, in Spokane to the I. E. U. headquarters in Portland show that the exact opposite was true. The reports of June 5 and 11, quoted above, state unequivocally that prospective McGoldrick employees were required to sign I. E. U. membership application cards before they received clearance slips entitling them to work for McGoldrick. It should be noted, in addition, that of the 11 persons named in the clearance slips intro- duced into evidence, 2 signed cards applying for membership in I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, before they obtained the clearance slips and before they started to work for McGoldrick. Seven others signed I. E. U. cards which bear the same date as their clearance slips. While it is impossible to determine from the documents whether the cards were signed before the clearance slips, or vice versa, we find, in view of the untrustworthy nature of McKay's testi- mony and the fact that in the cases where the documents are con- clusive, the cards were signed before the clearance slips, that the seven employees referred to above signed I. E. U. cards before receiv- ing clearance slips. The two other employees named on the clear- ance slips were never employed by McGoldrick. The record does not disclose whether or not they signed cards applying for member- ship in I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9. Moreover, any desire of the I. E. U. employment office to allow prospective employees free- domto choose or reject the I. E. U. was nullified by its admitted practice of giving preference in employment to I. E. U. members. The I. E. U. employment office was operated without charge to employees or employers, its purpose being to enlist employees in the ranks of the I. E. U. by securing jobs for them. Employees secur- ing jobs through the I. E. U. employment service were required to join the I. E. U. McGoldrick's practice of requiring prospective licGOLDRIOK LUMBER COMPANY 929 employees to secure clearance slips from the I. E. U. employment office before giving them work was, in effect, a requirement that they join the I. E. U. before working for it. We find that McGoldrick, by refusing to hire employees directly, but, instead, requiring them to secure clearance slips from the I. E. U. employment service before giving them work, has discriminated in regard to hire or tenure of employment and terms or conditions of employment in order to encourage membership in I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, and discourage membership in Local No. 2552 or any other labor organization, and that, by said acts, it interfered with, restrained, and coerced its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. 2. Alleged discrimination by Potlatch Forests The amended complaint against Potlatch Forests alleged that Potlatch Forests required of its employees membership in the I. E. U. as a condition precedent to employment in order to encourage mem- bership in the I. E. U. and discourage membership in Local No. 2584. This allegation was, denied by Potlatch Forests, and is riot supported by the evidence in the record before us. We shall order that the amended complaint against Potlatch Forests be dismissed in so far as it alleges that Potlatch Forests has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (3) of the Act. 3. Discrimination by Johnson a. Discrimination prior to the strike of Local No. 2803 The amended complaint against Johnson alleged that Johnson re- quired of its employees membership in the I. E. U. as a condition of employment in order to encourage membership in the I. E. U. and discourage membership in Local No. 2803 and Local No. 2751. John- son denied this allegation. The minutes of the May 27 meeting between the conference com- mittee of I. E. U. Local No. 50 and Johnson state, "All men hereafter shall be hired subject to the approval of the conference committee." The record shows that this minute was never read to Dean Johnson, the vice president and general manager of Johnson, or approved by him. Members of the conference committee and Dean Johnson denied that any understanding had been reached or put into effect whereby new employees were to be hired subject to.the approval of the con- ference committee. They further testified that the conference com- mittee had asked Johnson for a closed shop or for preferential hiring of I. E. U. members, and that after some discussion Dean Johnson had turned down both proposals. 930 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD On the other hand, many of Johnson's foremen asked employees to join I. E. U. Local No. 50, often accompanying their requests with statements indicating that the security of an employee's job was de- pendent on his compliance with such request. Also, on June 10, Sam Hunsaker, a supervisor in the shipping department and chair- man of the conference committee of I. E. U. Local No. 50, called a meeting of foremen and instructed them that I. E. U. men should be given preference - over A. F. of L. men when employees were laid off, because the I. E. U. had the bargaining agency at Johnson. The meeting was held in the office of Richardson, the superintendent, with his permission. During the months of June and July 1937, a number of Johnson's employees were laid off, transferred, or discharged. At a meeting with Johnson on August 2, representatives of Local No. 2803 claimed, after investigation, that Johnson had discriminated against certain of these employees because of their membership in Local No. 2803. Dean Johnson agreed to investigate the alleged discrimination as soon as a list of the persons allegedly discriminated against was furnished to him. Such a list, containing the names of 21 em- ployees,35 was supplied to Johnson by Local No. 2803 on August 3. On August 5 Dean Johnson sent a letter to Local No. 2803 discuss- ing generally the reasons for terminating the employment of the persons named on the list, and concluding, "In no case have any of these individuals been laid off, transferred or discharged because of their affiliation with any labor organization." We have considered the facts surrounding the discharge, transfer, lay-off, or refusal to reinstate each of the individuals claimed by Local No. 2803 to have been discriminated against by Johnson.36 Upon the basis of such consideration, we find that Johnson discour- aged membership in Local No. 2803 by discriminating against George Ham, Roy C. Mills, Mike Dule, A. F. Erickson, Levi Leifur, Roy Leifur, Ed Mock, and Earl P. Hoiness with respect to the tenure and condition of their employment. We shall discuss these cases below. We do not find, however, that Johnson discharged, laid' off, trans- ferred, or refused to reinstate Raleigh Aplet, Edwin Starr, H. L. Balcolm, C. O. East, E. R. Rich, Weldon Reed, Warren Young, Roy Campbell, E. A. Hoiness, Ray H. Hoiness, Russell Hoiness, Floyd Hoiness, Antone Jacobson, and Olaf Sjerslee, because of their mem- bership in and activity on behalf of Local No. 2803. 3' The names listed were : Raleigh Aplet, H. L. Balcolm , Roy Campbell, Mike Dule, C. 0. East, A. F. Erickson , George Ham, E . A. Hoiness, Ray H. Hoiness, Russell Hoiness, Floyd Hoiness, Antone Jacobson, Roy Lcifur, Levi Leifur, Roy C. Mills, Ed Mock, E. It. Rich, Weldon Reed, Olaf Sjerslce, Edwin Starr, and Warren Young. 30 Earl P. Hoiness is included in this category although his name was not transmited to Johnson on August i. We shall consider Earl IIoiness along with the other persons named in the list submitted to Johnson because he was one of a group laid off in the lath nnill , all of whom received similar treatment. McGOLDRICK JJUMBER COMPANY 931 George Ham. George Ham started to work for Johnson's prede- cessor in 1922. From 1933 until July 1937, he worked steadily in- specting lumber. He joined the I. - E. U. around June 22, 1937, at the suggestion of Sam Hunsaker, a supervisor in the shipping depart- ment and the chairman of the I. E. U. conference committee. Ham testified that at the time Hunsaker offered him an I. E. U. member- ship application card Hunsaker said, "I got word that if you don't sign up, this company is going to let you out. This will be your last week's work there." We cannot credit Hunsaker's denial of this statement in view of his admitted instructions to foremen on June 10 to give preference in employment to I. E. U. members. On June 26 Hain joined Local No. 2803. He wore his union button on the job. Around the middle of May 1937, Lew Sanford, the yard foreman and Ham's superior, shifted him from his regular job to inspecting a lumber shipment for Malarkey & Malarkey. When Ham com- pleted the job around June 20, he was shifted to a job in the rough shed rather than to his old job. The job in the rough shed was much "harder" and "dirtier" although it paid the same rate. Shortly after July 4, Jack Hanson, the head grader; asked Ham to work on the green chain, but Ham refused as Hanson was not his foreman. Thereafter, Earl Linn, who was the yard foreman while Sanford was on his vacation, ordered Ham to work on the green chain. Linn told Ham he would continue there until Sanford returned from his vacation. Ham replaced Jesse Brown on the green chain. Brown had been substituting in the job regularly performed by Earl Linn. When Sanford returned, he asked Ham to remain on the green chain so that he might teach Earl Linn the foreman's job. After about 2 weeks Linn took Ham's old job and Ham, in spite of his complaints to Sanford. was required to stay in Linn's old job. Jack Hanson, Earl Linn, and Lew Sanford were all members of I. E. U. Local No. 50. Roy C. Hills. Mills was employed as a wood picker under M. A. Gregory, the head watchman. Mills belonged to the A. F. of L. and Gregory knew it. Gregory was a member of I. E. U. Local No. 50. Early in June, Thorpe, who worked in the fuel house under Gregory, had to relinquish his*job because of illness. Mills asked Gregory for Thorpe's job, and was given it with the express understanding that he would have to work 48 hours a week, including a 4-hour shift each Saturday and Sunday. The first week that Mills had his new job he failed to come in on Sunday. On the following Tuesday Mills was put back at his old job of picking wood. Mills continued in that job until Friday when Gregory laid him off because of a lack,of work and gave him a transfer card. Mills never, came back to work again. 932 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD. At the time when Mills was laid off, around the middle of June, H. T. Armstrong, a member of I. E. U. Local No. 50, who was junior in service to Mills, was picking wood. After Mills' lay-off, J. F. Rico and C. E. Bockman were engaged in picking wood. Rico was junior in service to Mills. Roy Campbell, Mike Dule, A. F. Erickson, E. A. Hoiness, Ray H. Hoiness, Russell Hoiness, Earl P. Hoiness, Antone Jacobson, Roy Leifur, Levi Leifurr, Ed Mock, and Olaf Sjerslee were all members of Local No. 2803 employed by Johnson in its lath mill. Levi Leifur was the foreman. On June 9 Richardson, the superintendent, instructed Leifur to lay off a group of the lath-mill employees because of a falling off in orders. On the same day Leifur laid off nine of his employees. Two of them, E. A. Hoiness and Antone Jacobson, are included in the group under consideration. E. A. Hoiness received temporary em- ployment in the lath mill on June 18 and 19, and steady work begin- ning about July 1. Antone Jacobson worked in the lath mill again for a few days after his lay-off. On June 29 he was injured. By July 26 he was fit for work again, but he never applied to Johnson for other employment. Of the seven other employees who were laid off on June 9, six received other employment within a short time and one was unable to work because of an injury. Of the six receiving other employment, five belonged to I. E. U. Local No. 50 and one belonged to no union. On July 20 and 21 Richardson ordered both the night shift and the day shift of the lath mill laid off because there were no orders for lath. This involved the lay-off of 16 men, 11 of whom are under consideration here. The group of 11 includes all of the men em- ployed in the lath mill who belonged to Local No. 2803 named above, with the exception of Antone Jacobson. Of the 16 men laid off when the lath mill was closed, 10 received other employment with Johnson within a short time 31 and 6 did not. The six 38 who did not receive jobs were all members of Local No. 2803. Of the 10 who received jobs, 5 were members of I. E. U. Local No. 50, and 5 had signed membership application cards in both I. E. U. Local No. 50 and Local No. 2803. On July 25 Levi Leifur applied to Richardson, the superintendent, for other employment for the men who had been laid off in the lath mill. Richardson replied to Leifur that "he had plenty of lnen" at the time but that they should "come around and see if they could get something to do later." He also testified that "The men in the lath mill were.kept in mind for employment. If there had been jobs, 3" All received jobs prior to the strike of August 12 , 1937, and most of them within a week. 33 The names of these individuals are Mike Dule , A. F. Erickson, Levi Leifur, Roy Lelfur, Ed Mock, and Earl P. Hoiness. McGOLDRIC'K LUMBER COMPANY 933 every man in there would have gone to work. As it was, work was slackening up at the time, and it was a case with me, half of the time, just what to do with the men I had on the payroll ." Richardson's statement that "he had plenty of men" and his testimony quoted above, were untrue. During the period from July 21 , when the lath mill was shut down, until August 12, when the strike of Local No. 2803 occurred , Johnson " hired 14 new employees as common laborers in various parts of its plant . Seven of the 'new employees were hired on July 26, the day after Richardson had informed Levi Leifur that "he had plenty of men." Mike Dule, Levi Leifur, Roy Leifur, Ed Mock, A. F. Erickson , and Earl P. Hoiness were all capable of per- forming the jobs given to the new employees. In the light of the foregoing facts, and the further fact that many members 'of Local No . 2803 remained in the employ of Johnson until the strike of Local No. 2803 on August 13, we do not find that John- son has required of its employees membership in the I. E. U. as a condition of employment . However, on the basis of the above facts, we find that Johnson engaged in discriminatory activities with re- spect to the employment of George Ham, Roy C. Mills, Mike Dule, Levi Leifur, Roy Leifur , and Ed Mock and thereby served notice upon its remaining employees that concerted activities by them on behalf of Local No. 2803 would meet with reprisals by Johnson. We also find that Johnson, acting through its foremen, discouraged mem- bership in Local No. 2803 by indicating to its employees that job security could only be attained by joining the I. E. U. By all of these actions Johnson interfered with the exercise of its employees' right of self-organization guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, and engaged in conduct proscribed by Section 8 (1) of the Act. b. The strike and the alleged discrimination incident thereto At a meeting of Local No. 2803 held on July 30, 1937, the 22 dis- crimination cases mentioned above were put before the membership. A grievance committee was directed to take the cases up with Dean Johnson, and empowered to call a strike of Local No. 2803 if Johnson refused a conference . As noted above, the conference was held on August 2, and Dean Johnson agreed to reinstate two employees. He also agreed to consider the reinstatement of such other employees as Local No. 2803 claimed Johnson had discriminated against if a list of such employees was submitted to him. On August 3 Local No. 2803 submitted such a list to him, and on August 5 Dean Johnson apprised Local No. 2803 by letter that none of the employees on the list had been laid off, transferred, or discharged because of their affiliation with any union, and indicated that none of them would be reinstated immediately. 2S3030-41-vol. 19-60 934 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD After the conference between Local No. 2803 and Johnson on August 2, a rumor, the origin of which is unknown, that Johnson was going to hire 100 to 150 A. F. of L men and discharge some I. E. U. men was spread around the plant. Sam Hunsaker, a supervisor in the shipping department and the chairman of the conference com- mittee of I. E. U. Local No. 50, asked Dean Johnson if the rumor was true. Dean Johnson denied the rumor, but stated that he had conferred with Local No. 2803 on the previous day. He offered to meet with I. E. U. Local No. 50 that afternoon and explain what had taken place at the conference with Local No. 2803. Such a meet- ing took place. Dean Johnson reassured I. E. U. Local No. 50 that it was still the sole collective bargaining agency for the employees at the Toledo plant, and at the request of I. E. U. Local No. 50 agreed to notify the employees to that effect. On August 5 a notice was distributed to employees with their pay checks. The notice stated Johnson's "policy with regard to collective bargaining with its employees" at Toledo. It said that the I. E. U. was the only collective bargaining agency, that individuals could, nevertheless, present grievances first to their foremen and then to the superintend- ent or management, and that foremen were responsible for the effi- cient direction and cooperation of the amen with the foremen and with one another. It also instructed foremen "to take steps, with- out prejudice or favor, such as warning and/or discharge of any employee or employees engaging in • any activities that cause dissension and resentment in their forces while on company property." The first two paragraphs of the notice, by indicating that John- son would bargain only with the employer-dominated I. E. U., con- stituted a contribution of support to the I. E. U. within the meaning of Section 8 (2) of the Act, and an interference with the exercise of the rights of its employees guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. The last paragraph of the notice, containing the instruction to foremen quoted above, is on its face a prohibition against employees engaging in activities on company property which "cause dissension and resentment in their forces." However, when this part of the notice is read in conjunction with the rest of the notice, it is apparent that activities causing "dissension and resentment" referred to union activities, and that by the notice as a whole Johnson was telling its employees that the I. E. U. was the sole collective bargaining agency and that there should be no further union activity on company,, in an attempt to change the collective bargaining agency. Such a statement, coming after months of activity by the I. E. U. on com- pany property, coming after the I. E. U. had thereby achieved recognition as the exclusive representative of Johnson's employees, DIcGOLDR.ICIi LUMBER COMPANY 935 and coming after the need for such activity by the I. E. U. had passed, can only be viewed as an attempt to restrain the members of Local No. 2803 from furthering their cause. We find that John- son, by circulating the afore-mentioned notice, interfered with and restrained its employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed to them in Section 7 of the Act. On August 12, 1937, Local No. 2803 voted to go out on strike at the Toledo plant of Johnson. The reasons motivating Local No. 2803 in taking such action were (1) Johnson's discrimination against members of Local No. 2803 by refusing to reinstate them after the conference of August 2; (2) Johnson's circulation of the notice of August 5 referred to above; and (3) Johnson's domination and sup- port of I. E. U. Local No. 50. On the same day Local No. 2751, composed of Johnson's employees at its woods operations at Camp 12, voted to strike in support of Local No. 2803 because of Johnson's discrimination against the members of the latter organization. We find that Johnson's unfair labor practices caused the strike of its employees at Toledo and at Camp 12. On Monday, August 16, the first regular workday after the strike votes were taken, the Toledo plant and Camp 12 were picketed and a large number of employees refrained from going to work. The amended complaint against Johnson alleged that on August 16 Johnson discharged 400 employees at the Toledo plant and at Camp 12, and thereafter refused to reinstate them because of, their membership in, and activities on behalf of, Local No. 2803 and Local No. 2751. The evidence in the record bearing on this issue is in conflict. It appears that at noon on August 16, I. E. U. Local No. 50 had a meet- ing at the American Legion Hall. Sam Hunsaker, a supervisor in the shipping department and the chairman of the conference commit- tee of I. E. U. Local No. 50, addressed the meeting. He testified that he told the men that they had violated the contract between I. E. U. Local No. 50 and. Johnson by not going to work in the morning, but that he had talked to Richardson, the superintendent, who said that everything would be all right if they would come to work by 1 o'clock. Hunsaker testified that he urged the men to go back to work by 1 o'clock, stating "that if they. didn't show up by 1 o'clock, my agree- ment is done for." When some of the men said that they could not get back until 1: 30 o'clock Hunsaker told them, according to his testimony, that he would ask Richardson not to blow the whistle until 1: 30 o'clock. Hunsaker made this request of Richardson, and it was granted. Four other employees who attended the meeting testified that Hunsaker asked the men to go back to their jobs and told them that they would have until 1: 30 o'clock to return. One of the four, Ellis A. Wilson, testified further that he attended the meeting of 936 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD I. E. U. Local No. 50 held at noon on August 16, and that Hunsaker told the employees they would be discharged if they did not return to work by 1: 30 o'clock. Two other witnesses testified that someone reported to a meeting of Local No. 2803 held at 1 o'clock on August 16 that he had attended the meeting of I. E. U. Local No. 50 and that Hunsaker had told the men they would be discharged if they did not. return to work by 1: 30 o'clock. Other witnesses testified that they received similar information from other sources. Around 9 o'clock on the morning of August 16, Richardson met a group of about 100 employees and spoke to some of them, including McKay, while he was on his way uptown. The employees asked Richardson if they should go to work, and he told them "The jobs. are over there, but I don't know just how long they are going to be there." On August 18 Dean Johnson addressed the employees in front of the main office of the plant. He asked the employees present to tell.the employees who were not at work to return to their jobs. Employees returned to work on August 16 and for several days thereafter. It does not appear that any employees who went out on strike ever applied for work and were refused jobs. Moreover,. in February 1938, and thereabouts., several striking employees were notified that they might return to their jobs, but they refused until such time as the controversy between Johnson and Local No. 2803, I. W. A.3° was settled. In view of the uncertainty as to the actual content of Hunsaker's. statement to 'the meeting of I. E. U. Local No. 50 on August 16,. and the apparent willingness of Johnson to take back the strikers at all times, we do not find that Johnson discharged all of the striking employees who failed to return to work on August 16. We shall order that the allegations of Paragraph XVI of the amended com- plaint against Johnson be dismissed. c. Discrimination subsequent to the strike On September 15, 1937, Gus Sondenna, the chief engineer, notified six employees in the powerhouse who worked under his supervision that Richardson wanted to see them. At 3 o'clock in the afternoon the six employees, namely, Otis Bradley, Henry Robertson, Lester Harris, Everett Applegate, Ward Crum, and Delbert Goodman, met with Sondenna and Richardson, in the latter's office. Richardson told the men that he was going to lay them off because they belonged to the labor organization that was out on strike. He then asked them if it was not true that they belonged to the striking organiza- tion, and they said that it was true.4' Richardson then mentioned s9 See p. 901, supra. 90 All six of the employees were going through the picket line on passes from Local No. 2803. McGOLDR.IOK LUMBER OOMPANY 937 certain difficulties in the power plant, the fact that he suspected the difficulties were the result of sabotage, and that the employees could have their jobs back when the labor trouble was over. The employees 'then asked if their work was satisfactory, and Richardson said that it was. The following testimony of Richardson, on cross-examination by the Board's attorney, is illuminating : a Q. Then the reason that these men were laid off is that they are members of the organization that had placed a picket line around the company, is that correct? A. That is right. It was not any of those six that I mentioned that were on duty at the time the boiler was burned.41 On February 12, 1938, Otis Bradley returned to work for Johnson as a fireman in the powerhouse. Bradley's job is the same one that. he had before he was laid off on September 15, 1937, except that, in spite of his seniority, he now works on the night shift instead ,of the day shift. Bradley is the only one of the employees laid off in the powerhouse who joined the reestablished Local No. 2803,42 and is the-only one wlio lids` been reinstated. While we have held that an employer may, without .engaging in unfair labor practices, dismiss watchmen during a strike because he fears that they are too sympathetic to the union's cause to be trustworthy watchlnen,43 we do not think that such a case is presented here. The evidence does not support the existence of a belief on the part of Johnson that the six employees dismissed from the powerhouse would not satisfactorily perform their duties without danger to Johnson's property or business. Moreover, Johnson made no such contention. We find that Johnson, by laying off Otis Bradley, Henry Robert- son, Lester Harris, Everett Applegate, Ward Crum, and Delbert Goodman, because of their affiliation with Local No. 2803, which was picketing Johnson's mills, interfered with the exercise of its employees' right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. IV. THE EFFECT OF THE UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES UPON COMMERCE We find that the activities of McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, John- son, and the Operators' Association, respectively, set forth in Section 41 Record , pp. 11, 439-11, 440. '= See p. 001, supra. 43Matter of United States Stamping Company and Enamel Workers Union, No. IS830, 5 N. L. R . B. 172, 185. 938 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR IIELATIONS BOARD III above, occurring in connection with the operations of McGold- rick, Potlatch Forests, Johnson, and the Operators' Association, .respectively, described in Section I above, have a close, intimate, and subsfa tial relation to trade, traffic, and commerce among the several States and tend to lead to labor disputes burdening and obstructing commerce and the free flow of commerce. ° THE REMEDY Having found that McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, Johnson, and the Operators' Association have engaged in certain unfair labor practices, we shall order each of them to cease and desist from fur- ther engaging in such practices. We shall also order each of them to take certain affirmative action which we deem necessary to effectu- ate the policies of the Act. Since we have found that the I. E. U. is a labor organization dominated and supported by McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson, and each of them, as well as other employers, that I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, is a labor organization dominated and sup- ported by McGoldrick, that I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80 are labor organizations dominated and supported by Potlatch Forests, and that I. E. U. Local No. 50 is a labor organization dominated and supported by Johnson, we shall order McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson, respectively, to withdraw all recognition from the I. E. U. and the I. E. U. Locals at their respective operations as representatives of any of their respective employees for the purpose of dealing with them with respect to grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, or conditions of work, and completely disestablish the I. E. U. and said I. E. U. Locals as such representatives. We shall also order McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson, respectively, to cease and desist from giving effect to the contracts which each of them has signed with the I. E. U. Local or Locals which they have dominated and supported at their respective operations.44 We have found that the making of the contract by the Operators' Association with the I. E. U. on May 10, 1937, interfered with the administration of the I. E. U. and contributed support to it, and interfered with the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act to the employees of its members. In order to remedy this unlawful conduct in so far as possible, we shall order the Oper- ators' Association to cease and desist from such activities and to cease giving effect to said contract.45 Matter of West Kentucky Coal Cotn.pany and United Mine Workers of America, District No. 23, 10 N. L . R. B. 88. 45 National Labor Relations Board v . Stackpole Carbon. Co., 105 F. (2d) 167 (C. C. A. 3) enf'g as mod . Matter of Stackpole Carbon Company and United Electrical cE Radio Workers of America, Local No. 502, 6 N. L. R . B. 171. McGOLDR.TCK LUMBER. COMPANY 939 McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson, respectively, have engaged in the check-off of dues and initiation fees from the wages of 4L and I. E. U. members employed at their respective operations on the basis of authorizations -secured from such employees. We are concerned only with the amounts deducted since July 5, 1935, the effective date of the Act. What we said with respect to such activity in Matter of Heller Brothers Company of Newcomerstown and International Brotherhood of Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers, and Helpers 46 is applicable in the instant case. We there stated : It seems plain to us that the authorization by an employee for the check-off of dues owed to an organization which his employer has formed and continues to dominate cannot be con- sidered as having been voluntarily given by the employee. When check-off authorizations are sought under such conditions the employee is placed in the position of permitting the check- off or of placing himself squarely on record as openly opposed to the Company's wishes. No employee confronted with such ,in option can be regarded as having exercised free choice. Thus the same pressures by the respondent which compelled its em- ployees to abandon their free choice of representatives enforced their acquiescence in the check-off. Under these circumstances we will restore the status quo by ordering the respondent to reimburse its employees for amounts deducted from wages as dues for the Independent. Adapting the reasoning of the above-quoted paragraph to the facts in the instant case, we shall order McGoldrick and Johnson, respectively, to make whole their respective employees* individually for the full amounts deducted from their wages as dues and initiation, fees to the 4L or the 4L Locals at their respective operations and the I. E. U. or the I. E. U. Locals at their respective operations since July 5, 1935. We shall order Potlatch Forests to make whole its employees individually for the amounts deducted from their wages as dues and initiation fees to the 4L or the 4L Locals at its operations and to the I. E. U. and the I. E. U. Locals at its operations since July 5, 1935, in accordance with the terms of the stipulation entered into between Potlatch Forests and the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region, which was approved by the Board on October 4, 1939. We shall also order McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and John- son, respectively, to cease their use of the check-off on behalf of the I. E. U. and the I. E. U. Locals at their respective operations. We have found that the strike at Johnson's mill and camp was caused by its unfair labor practices. Johnson is, therefore, under a. 46 7 N. L. R. B. 646. 940 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD duty to restore the status quo which existed prior to the commission of the unlawful acts. We shall order Johnson, upon application, to offer to its employees who went out on strike on August 13, 1937, or thereafter, reinstatement to their former or substantially equivalent positions, without prejudice to their seniority or other rights or priv- ileges, dismissing, if necessary, all employees hired after the com- mencement of the strike. If, thereafter, by reason of a reduction in force there are not sufficient positions available for the remaining employees, including those to be reinstated, all available positions shall be distributed among such remaining employees in accordance with Johnson's usual method of -reducing its force, without discrim- ination against any employee because of his union affiliation or activ- ities and following a system of seniority to such extent as has here- tofore been applied in the conduct of Johnson's business. Those em- ployees remaining after such reduction, for whom there are no avail- able positions, shall be placed upon a preferential list prepared in accordance with principles set forth in the previous sentence, and shall thereafter, in accordance with such list, be offered employment in their former or substantially equivalent positions as such employ- ment becomes available and before other' persons are hired for such work. We shall also order Johnson to make whole all of the striking employees referred to above for any losses they may suffer by reason of any refusal of reinstatement or placement upon the preferential list as required above by payment to each of them of a sum of money equal to that which each of them would normally have earned as wages during the period from 5 days after the date of application for reinstatement or placement upon the preferential list, less his net earnings " during said period .411 We have also found that Johnson, by laying off Otis Bradley, Henry Robertson, Lester Harris, Everett Applegate, Ward Crum, and Del- bert Goodman on September 15, 1937, by refusing other employment to Mike Dule, Levi Leifur, Roy Leifur, A. F. Erickson, Earl P. Hoi- ness, and Ed Mock after the lath mill was shut down on July 21, by 44 By "net earnings " is meant earnings less expenses , such as for transportation, room, and board, incurred by an employee in connection with obtaining work and working elsewhere than for Johnson, which would not have been incurred but for Johnson's refusal to reinstate him in accordance with the Order herein and the consequent necessity of his seeking employment elsewhere. See Matter of Crossett Lumber Company and United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, Lumber and Sawmill Workers Union, Local 2590, 8 N. L. It. B. 440 enf'd, N. L. R. B. v. Crossett Lumber Company, 102 F. (2d) 1003 (C. C. A. 8). Monies received for work performed upon Federal,. State, county, municipal , or other work -relief projects are not considered as earnings , but, as provided below in the Order, shall be deducted from the sum due the employee, and the amount thereof shall be paid over to the appropriate fiscal agency of the Federal, State, county, municipal , or other government , or governments which supplied the funds for said work- relief projects. 48 Matter of Republic Steel Corporation and Steel Workers Organizing Committee, 9 N. L. R. B. 219, enf'd as mod., Republic Steel Corporation v. N. L. R. B., 107 F. (2d) 472 (C. C. A. 3). MIcGOLDRIOI LUMBER COMPANY 941 laying off Roy C. Mills, and by transferring George Ham to a less pleasant job, all such actions being taken because of the affiliation of said employees with Local No. 2803, interfered with the exercise of the rights of its employees guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. In order to remedy this unlawful conduct and effectuate the policies of the Act, we'?shall order Johnson to offer to said employees, except Roy Leifur, A. F. Erickson, and Earl P. Hoiness, reinstatement to their former positions without prejudice to their seniority and other rights and privileges.' We shall further order Johnson to make Roy C. Mills, Henry Robertson, Lester Harris, Everett Applegate, Ward Crum, and Delbert Goodman whole for any loss of pay they may have suffered by reason of their respective lay-offs by payment to each of them of a sum of money equal to the amount which he would normally have earned as wages from the date of his lay-off to the date of the offer of reinstatement, less his net earnings 50 during said period. We have found that Johnson reinstated Otis Bradley on February 12, 1938, and Roy Leifur, A. F. Erickson, and Earl P. Hoiness on March 2, 1938. We shall order Johnson to make Otis Bradley, Roy Leifer, A. F. Erickson, and Earl P. Hoiness whole for any loss of pay they may have suffered by reason of their respective lay-offs by pay- ment to each of them of a sum of money equal to the amount which he would normally have earned as wages from the date of his lay-off to the date of his reinstatement, less his net earnings 51 during said period. Johnson, by a letter dated February 26, 1938, offered to reinstate Levi Leifur on March 2, 1938, and by a notice dated February 26, 1938, offered to reinstate Mike Dule and Ed Mock on March 2, 1938. These offers were not accepted. By reason of the election of Dule, Levi Leifur, and Mock to continue on strike rather than return to work in accordance with Johnson's offers to them, their status changed after March 2, 1938, from laid-off employees to strikers. 52 We shall order Johnson to make Mike Dille, Levi Leifur, and Ed Mock whole for any loss of pay they have suffered by reason of their respective lay-off s by payment to each of them of a sum of money equal to the amount which he would normally have earned as wages from the date of his lay-off to March 2, 1938, when he refused Johnson's offer of reinstatement, less his net earnings 53 during said period. 49 Matter of Indianapolis Glove Company and Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America. Local No. 145, 5 N. L. R. B. 231. 00 See footnote 47, supra. 01 Ibid. 52 Matter of Harter Corporation and International Assn. of Machinists, 8 N. L. R. B. 391; Matter of Harry Schwartz Yarn Co., Inc. and Textile Workers Organizing Committee, 12 N. L. R. B. 1139; Matter of Horace G. Prettyman and Arthur J. Wiltse, copartners, doing business as The Ann Arbor Press and International Typographical Union, 12 N. L. R. B. 040 . See also Matter of Hemp & Company of Illinois, is Corporation and Federal Labor Union, Local No . 21284, Macomb, Illinois, 9 N . L. R. B. 449. 53 See footnote 47, supra. '942 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Upon the basis of the above findings of fact and upon the entire record in the case, the Board makes the following : CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen, Loyal Legion of Loggers and Lumbermen Local No. 76, District 9, Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80, District 10, and Local No. 50, District 1;%were, labor organizations,.within the meaning Of Section 2 (5)'of'.the Act. 2. Industrial Employees Union, Industrial Employees Union Local No. 76, District 9, Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, District 10, and Local No. 50, District 1, Lumber and Sawmill Workers Union, Locals Nos. 2552, 2584, 2751; and 2803, and Lumber and Sawmill Workers Union, Locals Nos. 63, 2751, and 2803, I. W. A., are labor organizations, within the meaning of Section 2 (5) of the Act. 3. Willamette Valley Lumber Operators' Association, Inc., is an employer within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act. 4. Industrial Employees Union, Industrial Employees Union, Local No. 76, District 9, Industrial Employees Union, Locals Nos..26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, and Industrial Employees Union, Local No. 50, are not employers, within the meaning of Section 2 (2) of the Act. 5. By dominating and interfering with the formation and adminis'- tration of the 4L, 4L Local No. 76, District 9, the I. E. U., and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, and by contributing financial and' other sup- port to said organizations, McGoldrick has engaged in and is engag- ing in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (2) of the Act. 6. By dominating and interfering with the formation and adminis- tration of the 4L, 4L Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80, the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, and by contributing financial and other support to said organizations, Potlatch Forests has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (2) of the Act. 7. By dominating and interfering with the formation and adminis- tration of the 4L, 4L Local No. 50, the I. E. U., and I. E. U. Local No. 50, and by contributing financial and other.support to said organiza- tions, and by interfering with the administration of the I. E. U. and contributing support to it through its agent, the Operators' Associa- tion, Johnson has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor prac- tices, within the meaning of Section 8 (2) of the Act. 8. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing their respective employees in the exercise of the rights gi aranteed in Section 7 of the McGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY . 943 Act, McGoldrick, Potlatch Forests, and Johnson, and each of them, have engaged in and are engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act. 9. By interfering with, restraining, and coercing the employees of its members in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act, the Operators' Association has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices; within the meaning of Section 8 (1) of the Act. 10. By interfering with the administration of the I. E. U. and con- tributing support to it, the Operators' Association has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (2) of the Act. 11.. By requiring membership in the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, as a condition of employment, thereby encouraging membership in a labor organization, McGoldrick has engaged in and is engaging in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (3) of the Act. 12. The aforesaid unfair labor practices are unfair labor practices affecting commerce, within the meaning of Section 2 (6) and (7) of the Act. 13. Potlatch Forests has not engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (3) of the Act as alleged in para- graphs XIV and XV of the amended complaint issued against it. 14. Johnson has not engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (3) of the Act as alleged in paragraph XVI of the amended complaint issued against it. ORDER Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the respondent, McGoldrick Lumber Company, and its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall: 1. Cease and desist from : (a) Dominating or interfering with the administration of the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, or with the formation or administration of any other labor organization of its employees, and from contributing financial or other support to the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, or any other labor organization of its employees ; (b) Recognizing the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, as-the representative of any of its employees for the purpose of dealing with it concerning grievances, labor disputes, rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of work; 944 ' DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD '(c) Giving effect to any contract it may have entered into with the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, concerning wages, hours, and working conditions , whether it be the contract in existence at the time of the hearing in this case or whether another has been entered into subsequent to said hearing; (d) In any manner requiring its employees to contribute to the. .upport ' of the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, and. in any manner making further deductions from the pay or ' wages. of its employees , or any of them , for dues or fees payable, or to become payable, to said organizations; (e) Encouraging membership in the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, or any other labor organization of its employees, by requiring as a condition of employment membership in the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, or any other labor organization of its employees , or in any other manner discriminating in regard to its employees' hire and tenure of employment or any term or condition of their employment; (f) In any . other manner interfering with, restraining , or coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing and to engage in concerted activities for the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection as guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act : (a) Withdraw all recognition from the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, as a representative of any of its employees for the purpose of dealing with it concerning grievances, labor disputes, rates of pay, wages , hours of employment , or other conditions of work, and completely disestablish the I . E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, as such representative; (b) Reimburse, individually and in full, all employees who were, or still are, members of the 4L, 4L.Local No. 76, District 9, or mem- bers of the I . E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9, or both, for all dues and fees which it has deducted from their wages, salaries, or other earnings since July 5, 1935, on behalf of the 4L, 4L Local No. 76, District 9, the I. E. U., or I. E. U. Local No. 76, District 9; (c) Immediately post notices to all- its employees in conspicuous places about its plant in Spokane, Washington, and maintain such notices for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days, stating that it will cease and desist in the manner set forth in paragraphs 1 (a) to 1 (f) of this Order, both inclusive , and that it will take the affirmative action set forth in paragraphs 2 (a) and (b) of this Order ; McGOLDRICK LUMBER COMPANY 945 (d) Notify the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region in writing within ten (10) days from the date of this Order what steps it has taken to comply herewith. Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact, stipulation, and conclusions of law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Relations Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the respondent, Potlatch Forests, Inc., and its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall: 1. Cease and desist from : (a) Dominating or interfering with the administration of the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, or with the formation or administration of any other labor organization of its employees, and from contributing financial or other support to the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, or any other labor organization of its employees ; (b) Recognizing the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, as the representative of any of its employees for the purpose of dealing with the respondent con- cerning grievances, labor disputes, rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, and other conditions of work; (c) Giving effect to any contract it may have entered into with the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, or any of them, concerning wages, hours, and working condi- tions, whether it be the contract in existence at the time of the hearing in this case or whether another has been entered into subsequent to said hearing; (d) In any manner requiring its employees to contribute to the support of the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, and in any manner making further deductions from the pay or wages of its employees, or any of them, for dues or fees payable, or to become payable, to said organizations; (e) In any other manner interfering with,. restraining, or coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization, to .form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, as guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. .2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act : (a) Withdraw all recognition from the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74,75, 76, 77, and 80, as representa- tives of any of its employees for the purpose of dealing with it concerning grievances, -labor disputes, rates of pay, wages,. hours of 946 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD employment , or other conditions of work, and completely disestablish the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73. 74, 75, 76, 77, and 80 as such representatives ; (b) Reimburse, individually and in full, all employees who were, or still are, members of the 4L, or 4L Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80 or the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, or both, for all dues and fees which it has deducted from their wages, salaries , or other earnings since July 5, 1935, on behalf of the 4L and 4L Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68 , 69, 70, 74, 76, 77, 78, and 80 or the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Locals Nos. 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, or both : Provided, That the total amount of such reimbursement shall not exceed $5000.00, and that reimbursement shall not be made until 90 days after the entry' of this Order, and then only to the individuals who, during such 90-day period, present applications to the respondent for a refund of said dues and fees. In the event that the total amount of the applications for refund of said dues and fees exceeds $5,000.00, each applicant shall be paid on a pro rata basis according to the amount of his claim ; (c) Immediately post notices to all of its employees in conspicuous places in and about its sawmills and manufacturing plants in Lewis- ton, Coeur d'Alene, and Potlatch, Idaho, and in and about its logging camps in Bovill, Headquarters, or Elk River, Idaho, whether those camps be known as camps 14 , 20, 21, 22, 31, 33, 34, R, S, and Head- quarters, or by some other tame , and maintain such notices for a period of at least sixty ( 60) consecutive days , stating that it will cease and desist in the manner set forth in paragraphs 1 (a) to 1 (e) of this Order, both inclusive, and that. it will take the affirmative action set forth in paragraphs 2 (a) and (b) of this Order; (d) Notify the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region in writing within ten (10) days from the date of this Order what steps it has taken to comply herewith. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that paragraphs XIV and XV of the amended complaint against Potlatch Forests, Inc., be, and they here- by are, dismissed in so far as they allege that Potlatch Forests, Inc., has engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of Section 8 (3) of the Act. Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the respondent, C. D. Johnson Lumber Corporation, and its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall: 1. Cease and desist from : (a) Dominating and interfering with tl ie ' administration , of the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 50, or with the formation or admin- .McGOLDRIC'K LUMBER COMPANY 947 istration of any other labor organization of its employees, and from contributing financial and other support to the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 50, or any other labor organization of its employees; (b) Recognizing the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Local No. 50 as the representative of any of its employees for the purpose of dealing- with it concerning grievances, labor disputes, rates of pay, wages,. hours of employment, and other conditions of work; (c) Giving effect to any contract it may have entered into with 1. E. U. or I. E. U. Local N. 50 edncerning wages, hours, and wo'rk'= ing conditions, whether it be the contract in existence at the time of the hearing in this case or whether another has been entered into subsequent to said hearings; (d) In any manner requiring its employees to contribute to the support of the I. E. U. or I. E. U. Local No. 50, and in any manner making further deduction from the pay or wages of its employees, or any of them, for dues or fees payable, or to become payable, to said organizations; (e) Acting through the Willamette Valley Lumber Operators' Association, or any other employer or, association of employers, in interfering with the administration of the I. E. U., or any other labor organization, or contributing support to it, or any other labor organization, or in interfering with, restraining, or coercing its em- ployees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection as guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act; (f) In any other manner interfering with, restraining, or coercing its employees in the exercise of their rights to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in concerted activities for the purposes of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection as guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds will effectuate the policies of the Act : (a) Withdraw all recognition from the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 50 as representatives of any of its employees for the pur- pose of dealing with it concerning grievances, labor disputes, rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, or other conditions of work, and completely disestablish the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 50 as such representatives; (b) Reimburse, individually and in full, all employees who were, or still are, members of the 4L and 4L Local No. 50 or the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 50, or both, for all dues and fees which it 948 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD has deducted from their wages, salaries, or other earnings since July 5, 1935, on behalf of the 4L and 4L Local No. 50 or the I. E. U. and I. E. U. Local No. 50; (c) Upon application, offer to those employees at its logging camp in Siletz, Oregon, and its sawmill in Toledo, Oregon, who went on strike on August 13, 1937, and thereafter, immediate and full re- instatement to their former or substantially equivalent positions with- out prejudice to their seniority or other rights or privileges, in the manner provided in the section entitled "The Remedy" above; and place those employees for whom employment is not immediately available upon a preferential list in the manner set forth in said section, and thereafter, in said manner, offer them -employment as it becomes avaliable; (d) Make whole all of the employees referred to in paragraph 2 (c) above for any losses they may suffer by reason of any refusal of reinstatement or placement upon the preferential list required by paragraph 2 (c) above by payment to each of them of a sum of money equal to that which each of them would normally have earned as wages during the period from 5 days after the date of application to the date of offer of reinstatement or placement upon the preferential list, less the net earnings 54 of each during said period; deducting, however, from the amount otherwise due to each of the said employees, monies received by said employees during said period for work per- formed upon Federal, State, county, municipal, or other work-relief projects; and pay over the amount so deducted to the appropriate fiscal agencies of the Federal, State, county, municipal, or other gov- ernment, or governments which supplied the funds for said work- relief projects; (e) Offer to Roy C. Mills, George Ham, Mike Dule, Levi Leifur, Ed Mock, Otis Bradley, Henry Robertson, Lester Harris, Everett Applegate, Ward Crum, and Delbert Goodman immediate and full reinstatement to their former positions, without prejudice to their seniority and other rights and privileges; (f) Make whole Roy C. Mills, Henry Robertson, Lester Harris, Everett Applegate, Ward Crum, and Delbert Goodman for any losses of pay they may have suffered by reason of their discriminatory lay- offs by Johnson, by payment to each of them, respectively, of a sum of money equal to that which he would normally have earned as wages from the date of his lay-off to the date of Johnson's offer of reinstatement, less his net earnings 55 during said period; deducting, however, from the amounts otherwise due to each of the said em- ployees, monies received by said employee3 during said period for 64 See footnote 47, supra. 55 I bid. McGOLDRIC'K- LUMBER COMPANY. 949 work performed upon Federal, State, county, municipal, or. other work-relief projects; and pay over the amount so deducted to the appropriate fiscal agencies of the Federal, State, county, municipal, or other government, or governments which supplied the funds for said work-relief projects ; (g) Make whole Otis Bradley, Roy..Leifur, A. F. Erickson, and Earl P. Hoiness for any losses of pay they may have suffered by rea- son of their discriminatory lay-offs by Johnson by payment to each of them of a sum of money equal to that which he would normally have earned as wages from the date of his lay-off to the date of his reinstatement, less his net earnings 56 during said period; deducting, however, from the amounts otherwise due to him, monies received by him during said period for work performed upon Federal, State, county, municipal, or other work-relief projects; and pay over the amount so deducted to the appropriate fiscal agencies of the Federal, State, county, municipal, or other government, or governments which supplied the funds for said work-relief projects; (h) Make whole Mike Dule, Levi Leifur, and Ed Mock for any losses of pay they may have suffered by reason of their discriminatory lay-offs by Johnson, by payment to each of them, respectively, of a sum of money equal to that which he would normally have earned as wages from the date of his,lay-off to March 2, 1938, when Johnson offered to reinstate him, less his net earnings 56 during said period; deducting, however, from the amounts otherwise due to each of the said employees, monies received by said employees during said period for work performed upon Federal, State, county, municipal, or other work-relief projects; and pay over the amount so deducted to the appropriate fiscal agencies of the Federal, State, county, municipal, or other government, or governments which supplied the funds for said work-relief projects ; (i) Immediately post notices to all its employees in conspicuous places in and about its logging camp near Siletz, Oregon, and its sawmill and manufacturing plant in Toledo, Oregon, and maintain such notices for a period of at least sixty (60) consecutive days, stating that it will cease and desist in the manner set forth in para- graphs 1 (a) to 1 (f) of this Order, both inclusive, and that it will take the affirmative action set forth in paragraphs 2 (a) to (h), inclusive, of this Order; (j) Notify the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region in writing within ten (10) days from the date of this Order what steps the respondent has taken to comply herewith. AND IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that paragraph XVI of the amended complaint against Johnson be, and it hereby is, dismissed in so far se See footnote 47, supra. 283030-41-vol. 19--61 950 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR' RELATIONS BOARD as it alleges that Johnson has engaged in unfair labor practices, within the meaning of Section 8 (3) of the Act. • Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, the National Labor Relations . Board hereby orders that the respondent, Willamette Valley Lumber Operators' Association, Inc., 'and its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, shall : 1. Cease and desist from : (a) Interfering with the administration of the I. E. U., or the formation or administration of any other labor organization, and contributing support to the I. E. U. or any other labor organization ; (b) Giving effect to any contract . it may have entered into with the I. E. U. concerning wages, hours, and working conditions, whether it be the contract in existence at the time of the hearing. in this case or whether another has been entered into subsequent to said hearing; (c) In any manner interfering .with, restraining, or coercing the employees of its members in the exercise of their rights to self- organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing and to engage in concerted activities for the purposes of collective bargain- ing or other mutual aid or protection, as guaranteed in Section 7 of the Act. 2. Take the following affirmative action which the Board finds. will effectuate the policies of the Act : . (a) Immediately notify, in writing, all of its members that it will cease and desist in the manner set forth in paragraphs 1 (a)., (b), and (c) of this Order; (b) Notify the Regional Director for the Nineteenth Region in writing within ten (10) days from the date of this Order what steps it has taken to comply herewith. . Upon the basis of the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, and pursuant to Section 10 (c) of the National Labor Rela- tions Act, the National Labor Relations Board hereby orders that the amended complaints against Industrial Employees Union, Indus- trial Employees Union Local No. 76, District 9, Industrial Employees Union Locals Nos. 26, 67, 68, 69, 70, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, and 80, and Industrial Employees Union Local No. 50, be, and they hereby are, dismissed. MR. WILLIAM M. LEISERSON took no part in the consideration of the above Decision and Order. I