NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD - FOURTH TERM AND RESIGNATION  1978 - 1983


TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
 
1981-1982 National Labor Relations Board
 
 
1981-1982 National Labor Relations Board

 

 

Years of Service
 
 

Howard Jenkins, Jr.'s
Years of Sevice Award

  Howard Jenkins, Jr. was re-appointed by President Jimmy Carter on September 15,1978. Bell & Howell Co. 230 NLRB 420 (1970), 598 F.2d 136 (D.C. Cir. 1979), cert. denied, 442 U.S. 942 (1979) gained appellate court support for the Handy Andy rationale. The case involved a company alleging that the Union practiced invidious discrimination based on sex. The Board denied the motion to disqualify and ordered issuance of certification. Jenkins dissented, citing his dissenting opinion in Handy Andy.  The Court of Appeals enforced the NLRB's order.  The Court endorsed the Board's Handy Andy position that challenge of alleged union practices of invidious discrimination through Section 8 in lieu of withholding certification would best effectuate the purpose of the NLRA. But in NLRB v. Heavy Lift Services, Inc. 234 NLRB 1078 (1978), enforced 607 F.2d 1121 (5th Cir. 1979), the Fifth Circuit reaffirmed the Eighth Circuit's Mansion House decision - that the Constitution requires withholding certification of a union practicing invidious discrimination, and affords an employer the opportunity to prove such discrimination as an affirmative defense in a charge alleging a Section 8(a)(5) refusal to bargain violation. Member Jenkins, citing his dissenting opinion in Handy Andy, added to his Bell & Howell dissent: "The availability of other remedies does not legitimize this unconstitutional conduct. The Constitution does not permit an arm of the Government to participate in invidious discrimination, against women or any other persons, until other remedies come into play." Jenkins, illustrating the short comings resulting from the Handy Andy approach ended by noting that Bell & Howell claimed the Union's discriminatory practices had an effect of excluding women from employment as stationary engineers; and as a consequence, there would not be a bargaining unit member to even seek enforcement of the Union's statutory obligations. 

The Bell & Howell decision seemed to accord the Board an important procedural victory to end the decade of the seventies. But on December 5, 1979, the Fifth Circuit in the NLRB V. Heavy Lift Services, Inc., 607 F.2d 1121 (1979), stated that if the employer had supported its allegations with a sufficient amount of evidence, the claim of race discrimination would properly have been before the Board. 

The final paragraph of the dissenting opinion in Bell & Howell highlights Board Member Jenkins' deep and ever abiding concern and commitment that all employees-regardless of race, creed, color, sex, religion, or national origin - must be fairly represented by their statutory bargaining representative, and the NLRB' responsibility to insure them this protection. Member Jenkins', dissent states that: "The national policy against discrimination in employment is poorly served by this decision of my colleagues. Moreover, this decision represents a clear abrogation of our constitutional duty to refrain from sanctioning, assisting , supporting invidious discrimination. Indeed, this decision marks a step backward for all those who would seek the good offices of our Agency to combat discrimination whether it be on the basis of race, creed, color, sex, religion, or national origin." 

On August 27, 1983 Howard Jenkins, Jr. tenure on the NLRB came to a close. Howard dedicated twenty years of his life as a member on the NLRB. His record during these years illustrates that he believed that labor rights should be equally protected for all by the National Labor Relations Board. In Howard Jenkins, Jr. letter of resignation to President of the United States, Ronald Reagan, he stated that:  " In my four terms spanning twenty years on the Board, under appointments by both Republican and Democratic Presidents, it has been a pleasure to have helped formulate many important principles and decisions which have, with court approval, become a major part of our national labor policy. Among these, and one in which I took the lead, is the now well-accepted principle that race and sex discrimination are unfair labor practices prohibited by the National Labor Relations Act" 

 

 
 

 


 

Exhibit at the University of Denver, School of Law
 

Exhibit at the University of Denver, School of Law

 

1982-1983
 
 
National Labor Relations Board 1982-1983

 

Exhibit at the University of Denver, School of Law
 
 

Exhibit at the University of 
Denver, School of Law


 
Previous Chapter   Table of Contents
Related Sites  References