OPPapers.com

National Labor Relations Board (Buck Brown Contracting Co., Inc. And A.S.C. Constructors, A Joint Venture)

Introduction

This paper will discuss several cases involving Buck Brown Contracting Co., Inc. and A.S.C. Constructors, a Joint Venture and several employees. Each employee claims to have been unjustly fired from their job and seek reinstatement and compensation for lost wages. In the paper I will briefly discussed the history of each case; which part of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) applies to each case, how each case was decided, resolved and how the resolution was implemented.

Historical Background

Randal Fansler was discharged from his job on May 6, 1980. He accuses the respondent of unlawful interrogation in violation of Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act. On April 23, 1980 Fansler spoke with a Union Steward in reference to a pay dispute and the lack of sanitary outhouse facilities. A few hours after Fansler's meeting with his Union Steward he was questioned about his meeting by his supervisor. The Judge in this case ruled that the respondent did nothing wrong concerning the questioning of Randal Fansler. The Judge reached this conclusion because of the informal setting in which this incident occurred; Fansler's honest and intimidating demeanor with management; and the subsequent apology by the supervisor for his behavior. The Judge did find that when Fansler tried to resolve his pay problem and seek assistance in improving the work facilities through the union he was working in a capacity that was protected under the NLRA and therefore could not be discharged for those actions.
On May 14, 1980, Robert Kelly was discharged for raising complaints about contract violations and poor working conditions. Kelly complained about the lack of cold drinking water, sanitary facilities to use and the foreman doing work that should be reserve for union employees. Kelly believes he was fired because if his complaints. This was a violation of Section 8(a)(1) and (3) of the NLRA. The Judge in this case concluded that the crew...