Before EVANS, SPARKS and KERNER, Circuit Judges.
By this petition plaintiffs seek to review and, in part, set aside an order of the National Labor Relations Board of June 22, 1945. The Board petitions for its enforcement. The parties will be referred to as Keystone, Alliance, the Board, and the C.I.O. Union.
The complaint which resulted in the order was filed on April 8, 1944. It was Based upon charges filed by the C.I.O. Union on February 15, 1943, that Keystone was guilty of unfair labor practices under Section 8(1) and (2) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 158(1-3), referred to as the Act, in that it had dominated and interfered with the formation and administration of Alliance, an independent Union, all of whose members were in the employment of Keystone. On July 13, 1943, the charges were amended by also alleging Keystone's violation of Section 8(3) of the Act, by discharging seven of its employees because they were members of the C.I.O. Union. On July 14, 1943, the charges were again amended by adding the name of another employee, who, as alleged, was discharged because of his membership in the C.I.O. Union, in violation of Section 8(3) of the Act. On April 8, 1944, the charges were again amended by further alleging that in September 1933, Keystone formed, instigated and thereafter supported, financed and interfered with the administration of the Keystone Employees Association, an independent labor organization, referred to as K.E.A.; that in 1937, Keystone instigated and formed the Independent Steel Worker's Alliance as successor to K.E.A., and since that date has dominated and interfered with the administration of Alliance, and illegally recognized and dealt with it as the exclusive bargaining agency of all Keystone employees, and encouraged membership in it; and that on or about June, 1942, and thereafter, Keystone interfered with, restrained and coerced its employees in the exercise of their rights to join and assist the C.I.O. Union.
On April 12, 1944, Alliance, by permission of the Board, intervened and filed its answer to the complaint.On June 7, 1944, the charges were again amended by further alleging that in December 1940, Keystone violated Section 7 of the Act by promulgating a rule prohibiting all forms of solicitation for labor organizations upon the Keystone's property, which rule was used by Keystone to protect Alliance and to impede the C.I.O. Union in its organization campaign.
The complaint was amended to consist with the charges and its amendments, and petitioners denied the material allegations of the complaint. At the conclusion of the Board's evidence, Keystone and Alliance each moved to dismiss the complaint, which motions were denied. At the conclusion of all the evidence, like motions were made by the same parties and denied. The Board filed its intermediate report in which it made special findings of facts, and in substance recommended that Keystone should:
1. Cease and desist from:
(a) Contributing support to, or dominating or interfering with the formation or administration of Alliance, or any other labor organization of its employees.
(b) Giving effect to any and all contracts with Alliance.
(c) In any other manner interfering with any of its employees in the exercise of their rights to self organization, to form labor organizations, to join or assist the C.I.O. Union, or any other labor organization, 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 as guaranteed in section 7 of the Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 157.
2. (a) Withdraw all recognition from Alliance, as representative of any of its employees for the purpose of dealing with Keystone concerning grievances, labor disputes, wages, rates of pay, hours of employment, or other conditions of employment, and completely disestablish Alliance as such representative.
(b) Rescind immediately the rule against solicitation on employee's own time.
(c) and (d) Give the usual notices required by the Act.
The Board further recommended that the complaint be dismissed as to the eight employees alleged to have been discharged by Keystone because they were members of the C.I.O. Union.
The recommendations follow the findings rather closely. However, the legal questions presented to us, for the most part, are whether certain findings are supported by substantial evidence.
The dominant question before us is whether there is substantial evidence to support the Board's finding that Keystone dominated and interfered with the formation and administration of Alliance. Under respondent's theory, and answer to this question involves historical facts relating to K.E.A., which was organized in September, 1933. From about that date until ...