Nlrb v. Hearst Publications, Inc., 322 U.S. 111 (1944)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 322 U.S. 102, click here.
Labor Board v. Hearst Publications, Inc.
No. 336
Argued February 8, 9, 1944
Decided April 24, 1944 *
322 U.S. 111
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
1. The meaning of the term "employee" in the National Labor Relations Act is to be determined not exclusively by reference to common law standards, local law, or legal classifications made for other purposes, but with regard also to the history, context and purposes of the Act and to the economic facts of the particular relationship. Pp. 120, 129.
2. The determination of the National Labor Relations Board that, in the circumstances of the case, a person is an "employee" under the National Labor Relations Act, may not be set aside on review if it has warrant in the record and a reasonable basis in law. P. 130.
3. The conclusion of the National Labor Relations Board that "newsboys" distributing respondents’ papers on the streets of the city were employees under the National Labor Relations Act is supported by the findings and the evidence, and has ample basis in the law. P. 131.
The Board found that the "newsboys" work continuously and regularly, rely upon their earnings for the support of themselves and their families, and have their total wages influenced in large measure by the publishers (respondents), who dictate their buying and selling prices, fix their markets and control their supply of papers; that their hours of work and their efforts on the job are supervised and to some extent prescribed by the publishers or the publishers’ agents; and that a substantial part of their sales equipment and advertising materials is furnished by the publishers with the intention that it be used for the publishers’ benefit.
4. The Board’s designation of the collective bargaining units in this case -- (1) full-time newsboys and "checkmen," engaged to sell papers within the city, and excluding bootjackers, temporary, casual, and part-time newsboys; and (2) newsboys selling at established spots in the city, four or more hours per day, five or more days per week, except temporary newsboys -- was within its discretion, and is sustained. P. 132.
(a) That the Board’s selection of the collective bargaining units emphasizes difference in tenure, rather than in function was, on the record in this case, not an abuse of discretion. P. 133.
(b) The Board’s exclusion of suburban newsboys from the collective bargaining units, on the ground that they were not organized by the union, was, on the record in this case, not an abuse of discretion. P. 133.
136 F.2d 608 reversed.
Certiorari, 320 U.S. 728, to review decrees denying enforcement of orders of the National Labor Relations Board (39 N.L.R.B. 1245,1256) and setting aside the orders.