11/30/2023 0 Comments Hawaiian dredging![]() So too of those engaging in a `sympathetic strike,' or secondary boycott the immediate quarrel does not itself concern them, but by extending the number of those who will make the enemy of one the enemy of all, the power of each is vastly increased. The rest know that by their action each one of them assures himself, in case his time ever comes, of the support of the one whom they are all then helping and the solidarity so established is `mutual aid' in the most literal sense, as nobody doubts. When all the other workmen in a shop make common cause with a fellow workman over his separate grievance, and go out on strike in his support, they engage in a `concerted activity' for `mutual aid or protection,' although the aggrieved workman is the only one of them who has any immediate stake in the outcome. "Certainly nothing elsewhere in the act limits the scope of the language to `activities' designed to benefit other `employees' and its rationale forbids such a limitation. 1953), where it appeared that the employees engaged in the "activities" in question were all members of a union but acted independently of their bargaining representative, this court declared that "`concerted activities for the purpose of * * * mutual aid or protection' are not limited to union activities." (p. Yet the Court held the "activity" was protected under Section 7 as one for "mutual aid or protection." The Court's stress on the lack of such a representative does not, in our estimation, indicate a different result had the men been organized, but was noted to emphasize that " nder these circumstances, they had to speak for themselves as best they could." And in Salt River Valley Water Users Ass'n v. 2d 298 (1962) there was no suggestion that the walkout was incident to any bargaining - indeed the workmen involved were not organized and had no bargaining representative. We do not agree that Section 7 must be so narrowly construed. Fred then drove Michael home and, on returning, was told that he (Fred) was "all through." He told Fred that either Michael would work in the culvert or they both could quit. Finally Guillot ordered Michael into his truck and proceeded to also pick up Fred and drive them to where Fred's car was parked. During lunch and repeatedly throughout the afternoon Fred persisted in complaining both to Guillot and to his own foreman about the Company's failure to supply the men with goggles and respirators. Michael stated he didn't feel like eating because the dust had made him sick. ![]() At noon the crew was joined for lunch by Fred. This was not done, although the men "griped" considerably among themselves about their difficulty in breathing and being hit with flying rocks. Working in shifts, each member of the crew took a 10 or 15 minute turn with the nozzle while the other or others remained outside "catching fresh air." During the morning a state inspector, who happened by, told the crew's foreman to get goggles and respirators for the crew. ![]() The size of the culvert made it necessary for a man to stand inside, and the force of the air raised great clouds of dust and blew debris about. However, on the morning of this particular day Michael was assigned to a labor crew in the charge of Foreman Guillot and put to work cleaning out culverts. ![]() Fred Crawford and his son Michael were both employed on the Company's Lower Kula Road Project, Fred as a motor grader operator and Michael as a grade checker.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |