for supervisors, an accompanying memo to each employee, and the instruction sheet. A meeting of the division heads to review these plans is scheduled for 2:00 on this day. Acting Regional Director, Sixth Region: Robert H. Kleeb was designated Acting Regional Director of the Sixth Region from July 23 to July 27, 1940, inclusive, and from August 3 to August 17, 1940, inclusive. The Board ratified the following actions taken by the Director of Personnel: Raymond J. Stockero: Under Mail & File Clerk to File Clerk (Docket) General Counsel, Special Committee to Investigate the N. L. R. B., House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. TOLAND: Replying to your letter of the 11th, the only memorandum I have written concerning this case is the following note which I sent to Mr. Emerson of the Review Division on March 12th, 1940, indicating that I wanted the whole complaint dismissed and that I disagreed with the majority of the Board: "I am in agreement with the Trial Examiner and think the whole complaint should be dismissed. The alleged 8 (1) was old stuff when there was no real union activity. Jelling lied about being fired (paragraph 14 Int. Rept.) and the Trial Examiner evidently didn't believe him." Subsequently I dissented as printed in the decision dated March 26th, 1940. (21 N. L. R. B., No. 111.) On May 8th there was a meeting of the Board at which Mr. Fahy and Mr. Watts recommended that the decision in this case should not be enforced and that the Board's order should be set aside. There was a good deal of discussion of the question, but I took no part in it. I was naturally glad to see the majority of the Board dismiss the complaint, as I had recommended in my dissenting opinion. Sincerely yours, WM. M. LEISERSON. P. S. I also have a letter from you dated June 11th inquiring about the cases in which I have not participated. It will take me some time to get the necessary information in order to answer your questions, and as soon as I have that information I will write you. EXHIBIT No. 1481 (Accompanying letter printed in the running record.) Name of company and number of case Douglas Aircraft Co., Inc., Northup Division, C-557. Hartsell Mills Company, C-943 and R-970. California Walnut Growers Association. Stromberg-Carlson Telephone Manufacturing Company, C-612 Bauman Brothers Furniture Manufacturing Company, C-1174, Weinberger Banana Co., Inc., C-785 and R-768. Theurer Wagon Works, Inc., C-563. Niles Fire Brick Company, C-958 and R-362. Republic Creosoting Company, C-448 Jac Feinberg Hosiery Mills, Inc., C-774 and R-770. Ford Motor Company, C-398. McKesson & Robbins, Inc., C-1103 and C-1104 McGoldrick Lumber Company, C-639 to C-642, inclusive. Wilson & Company, R-1138 and C-1149. West Oregon Lumber Company, C-963 and R-1014. Air Associates, Incorporated, C-1175. Pittsburgh Standard Envelope Company, C-926 Quality Art Novelty Co., Inc., C-1032 and R-844. Virginia Electric & Power Company, C-914 to C-916, inclusive. Ryan Car Company, C-1028. Chicago Casket Company, C-25. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company of Alabama, C-311 Ohio Greyhound Lines, Inc., R-1225, C-1246 and C-1247. McAlbert Oil Company, Inc., C-1087 and R-1039. The M. A. Hanna Company, et al, C-939 and R-840. Beckerman Shoe Corporation, C-723 and C-724. Walworth Company, Inc., C-927 Killefer Manufacturing Corporation, C-843 and R-857. Firestone Tire and Rubber Company of California, C-570. Isthmian Steamship Company, Ĉ-969 Brown Shoe Company, R-967 and C-957. Citation 18 N. L. R. B., No. 9.. 18 N. L. R. B., No. 91. 18 N. L. R. B., No. 92. 19 N. L. R. B., No. 72. 21 N. L. R. B., No. 22. Date Board advised of nonparticipation 11/24/39 11/16/39 12/4:39 11/13/39 10/9/39 12/9:39 10/2/39 11/30/39 12/15/39 12/4:39 12/1/39 12/15/39 11/25/89 87/39 12/29/39 1/2/40 10/9/39 1/16/40 8/7/39 1/31/40 9/13:39 1/2/40 1/2/40 2/1/40 1/31/40 28:40 2/9/40 2/19/40 1/2/40 2/26/40 3/6/40 3/6/40 3/8/40 3/13/40 3/11/49 12/16/39 4/8/40 12/16/39 5/3/40 23 N. L. R. B., No. 58.. 4/1/40 5/1/40 5/1/40 [Copy] NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Attention: Mr. Emerson. From: Leiserson. Date: 12/4/39. I have decided not to participate in these cases. The net effect of the method of handling the cases was to postpone the election unnecessarily for more than a year and a half. WML (The above note in pencil was attached to tentative draft in Bauman Brothers Furniture, Cases C-1174 and R-1106.) To: Mr. Emerson. [Copy] INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD From: Wm. M. Leiserson. Subject: Bauman Brothers Furniture Mfg. Co., C-1174, R-1106. 11/20/39. This is O. K., but sentence on page 17 leaving open question of 8 (3). We decide that there is no 8 (3) and should not suggest that the question is still open. Also, in regard to the appropriate units, on page 10 the term "production" employees in ambiguous. As first used, it includes upholsterers, but in the next paragraph upholsterers are excluded.. We say that there are separate contracts for (1) upholsterers and (2) woodworkers. This seems a better way to distinguish the two units. See also page 24. [Copy] INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION WML NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD To: Mr. Madden, Mr. Smith, Mr. Emerson. Subject: Magnolia Petroleum Company, C-940, R-735. NOVEMBER 13, 1939. I do not want to participate in this case. The petitions for representation were confused with the complaint, and I do not think that we ought to issue a direction of election on a record made a year and a half ago. The oral argument was heard December 1, 1938, and I cannot understand why the drafting of the decision was so long delayed. Subject: Killefer Manufacturing Corporation, C-843 Amendment to Complaint. I do not think an amendment to the complaint is the best way to handle this matter. It will be necessary to give ten days notice, and a hearing may be required. The proposed decision and order also directs an election at some future date, and since the hearing was held in 1938 I don't think we will be able to hold an election in 1940 on the facts gathered two years before. It will therefore be necessary to have another hearing on the representation dispute. It seems to me, therefore, that it would be better to close this case as soon as possible by dismissing the complaint and asking the union if it wants an election right away. If it does not want an election now on account of the individual contracts, then a new charge and complaint should be filed on those individual contracts, and when this is out of the way an election can be ordered. If the individual contracts have expired and no attempt has been made to renew them, the union may prefer to settle the whole matter by an election. WML [Copy] INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD To: Mr. Emerson. From: Wm. M. Leiserson. Subject: Killefer Manufacturing Corporation, C-843. I prefer not to sign this amended complaint. 218054-40-vol. 24, pt. 1--10 DEC, 26, 1939. WML [Copy] INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD DEC. 7, 1939. To: Mr. Madden, Mr. Smith, Mr. Emerson. From: Wm. M. Leiserson. Subject: Heyward Granite Company, C-729, C-730, C-731, C-1332. There is enough here so I can go along with this decision. But it is a weak case, and the remedy is rather futile. What would we do about enforcement? WML Subject: Hammond Redwood Company, C-593. Since this is an old case dating from 1937, I shall not participate in it. [Copy] NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD Attention: Mr. Emerson. From: Leiserson. Date: 11/16/39. Not participate. WML Old (Oct., 1937) and petition and complaint are mixed up. WML (Above note in pencil was attached to tentative draft in Hartsell Mills Cases C-943 and R-970.) [Copy] INTER-OFFICE COMMUNICATION NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD AUGUST 7, 1939. To: Mr. Emerson. From: Wm. M. Leiserson. Subject: Republic Creosoting Company, C-448. I cannot participate in this case. Madden and Smith will have to adjust the differences between them. The case is more than two years old, and the oral argument was heard more than a year ago. If I were to have any part in de ciding this case, I would have to go back to the original handling of the case in the regional office and to the authorization of the complaint in this office in order to make sure that the case was properly handled. That, together with reviewing the record, would take entirely too long, and the case has already been too long delayed. WML EXHIBIT NO. 1486 (Pencil notation:) Think he is too publicly identified with so-called radical activities to appear as counsel for the Board. A. L. WIRIN ATTORNEY-AT-LAW 1022 Civic Center Building, Los Angeles, Calif. Counsel, American Civil Liberties Union. JOHN S. CARMODY, C. M. AUGUST 24, 1935. National Labor Mediation Board, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. CARMODY: The proper way to begin this letter, according to the rules of Emily Post and her ilk, is to say: "Congratulations! not only to you and all of organized labor throughout the country, but to the President on the vision he showed in picking you out of the many aspirants, and particularly to the nation which will be benefited from your promotion." Although I do want to convey congratulations, it none the less would seem hypocritical for me to begin the letter as above, because confessedly its primary purpose is not at all to congratulate you but is rather to feather my own nest. And so I come down to business at once. For some days I have rationalized my desire to become attached to the National Labor Relations Board into a firm conviction that it is actually imperative for the welfare of the country that I do this. Actually, what I want is to have a hand in testing out the constitutionality of the Wagner Bill and to tell the courts, and particularly the Supreme Court, what I think of them because of their recent decisions on social legislation—and I would like to play that role by representing the Board here in Los Angeles or elsewhere along the Pacific Coast. And now that I am being frank and in a confessional mood, let me say that I thought that a couple of years with the Board might give me that prestige which I think I need in being counsel for the Civil Liberties Union. I thought if vigilantes knew that I had been a government official their irresistible passion to kidnap, tar or feather me in strike situations might be somewhat resisted. In any event, this note is really in the nature of a formal notice that I am leaving for Washington tonight and expect to be there next Thursday or Friday. I promise to look you up and to make every effort to coerce you into becoming a victim of my designs. National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CARMODY: I understand that Mr. A. L. Wirin, now of Los Angeles, California, is being considered by the Board for a position as one of its counsel. I have known Mr. Wirin for many years and consider him a highly competent lawyer. It seems to me that he might well be a valuable addition to the Board's legal staff. Sincerely yours, DAVID I. WALSH. |