Swift & Co.

In the Matter of Swirr & COMPANY and UNITED PACKING Housz WORKERS LOCAL INDUSTRIAL UNION #814 Case No. C-92.3 AMENDMENT TO DECISION AND ORDER February 29,194,0 On October 9, 1939, the National Labor Relations Board, herein called the Board, issued a Decision and Order in the above-entitled case.'- On February 9, 1940, the Board gave notice that on February 19, 1940, or as soon thereafter as convenient, unless sufficient cause to the contrary had been shown, it would amend its Decision and Order in certain respects, set forth below. On February 15, 1940, Swift & Company, herein called the respondent, filed with the Board objections to the proposed amendment to the Decision and Order. The Board having considered the objections so filed hereby amends: its Decision and Order as follows : (1) By adding to the Decision and Order of the Board, immedi- ately after the seventh paragraph of the Statement of the Case, the following sentences and footnotes : `During the. course of the hearing counsel for the Board moved that the record in this case be consolidated with the records in Matter of Swift & Company, a corporation, and Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen of North America, Local` No. 641, and United Packing House Workers Local Industrial Union No. 300, Case No. C-355,3a and Matter of Swift c€ Com- pany and United Automobile Workers of America, Local No. 265, Matter, of Swift c6 Company and United Packing House Workers L. I. Union No. 328 affiliate C. 1. 0., Cases Nos. C-484 and R-605 3b for whatever evidentiary value the, testimony and evidence introduced in these two records may have as far as this proceeding is concerned. The Trial Examiner reserved his ruling on the said motion and in his Intermediate Report made the following statement.: "'During the hearing an oral motion was made by counsel for the Board that the evidence contained in Board Exhibits Nos. 115 N. L. R. B. 992. 20 N. L. R. B., No. 99. 1028 SWIFT & OOMI'ANY . 1029 6 and, 7, being;B.oard,decisions in other cases against the respond- ent, viz., Nos. C-355, and C-484, and R-605, all decided May 20,, 1938, be consolidated with the evidence in the instant case .. . the motion is now granted, in so far as these exhibits pertain to the present case."' While it is not clear whether or not the quoted statement was intended to apply to the aforesaid motion, it is not necessary to construe the statement since the motion is hereby denied. ae 7 N. L. R. B. 269. an 7 N. L. R. B. 287." (2) By striking from the next to last paragraph of Section III B of the Findings of Fact contained in the Decision and Order of the Board in the above-entitled case as printed at page 13 of 15 N. L. R. B., No. 110, the following two sentences and accompanying footnote: "It may be noted, also, that the same pattern of procedure was followed by the respondent at its plants in Denver, Colorado, Evansville, Indiana, and National City, Illinois, where em- ployee representation plans were dissolved with like results.'4 It seems to us more than a coincidence that from several of such meetings came the organization of `inside' unions which received the quick recognition of the respondent. i' See cases cited supra, note 11" 283031-41-vol. 20-66