Miami Coca-Cola Bottling Co.

National Labor Relations Board - Board Decisions

Apr 14, 1965

151 N.L.R.B. 1701 (N.L.R.B. 1965)

MIAMI COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 1701
This notice must remain posted for 60 consecutive days from the date of posting,
and must not be altered, defaced, or covered by any other material.
Employees may communicate directly with the Board's Regional Office, 614 ISTA
Center, 150 West Market Street, Indianapolis, Indiana, Telephone No. Melrose
3-8921, if they have any question concerning this notice or compliance with its
provisions.
Miami Coca-Cola Bottling Company and Ralph Gonzalez,
Brendan Coughlin, General Sales Drivers & Allied Employees
Union , Local No. 198, International Brotherhood of Teamsters,
Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of America, Richard
W. Loban, and Robert W. Shephard . Cases Nos. 12-CA-2058-1,
12-CA-2058-.., 12-CA-..097, 12-CA-2157-1, and 12-CA-2157-2.
April 14, 1965
SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION AND ORDER
On September 28, 1962, the National Labor Relations Board,
herein called the Board, issued a Decision and Order in the above-
entitled proceedings,'. finding, inter alia, that the Respondent had
discriminatorily discharged Brendan Coughlin, Donald Elgie, Ralph
Gonzalez, and Robert W. Shephard in violation of Section 8(a) (3)
and (1) of the Act and directing that the Respondent make whole
the above-mentioned employees for any loss of earnings resulting
from the discrimination. Thereafter, on November 19, 1963, the
United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit entered its
decree enforcing the aforesaid Board Order .2
On April 24, 1964, the Regional Director for Region 12 of the
Board issued backpay specifications and, on May 8, 1964, the
Respondent filed an answer thereto. Upon appropriate notice issued
by the Regional Director for Region 12, a hearing was held before
Trial Examiner Benjamin B. Lipton on June 15 and 16 and August 5,
1964, for the purpose of determining the amounts of backpay due
the four claimants. The Regional Director's Backpay Specifica-
tions were amended by stipulations entered into at the hearing. On
December 10, 1964, the Trial Examiner issued his attached Supple-
mental Decision, in which he found that the discriminatees were
entitled to the following payments together with interest at 6 per-
cent per annum on each of the quarterly sums found due from the
end of each calendar quarter: Donald Elgie, $2,518.63; Ralph Gon-
zalez, $4,000.00; Brendan Coughlin, $8,747.28; and Robert W. Shep-
hard, $9,271.28. Thereafter, the General Counsel and the Respond-
ent filed exceptions to the Trial Examiner's Supplemental Decision
and the Respondent filed a supporting brief.
1138 NLRB 1209.
N.L.R.B. v. Miami Coca-Cola Bottling Company, 324 P. 2d 501.
151 NLRB No. 160.
1702 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Pursuant to the provisions of Section 3 (b) of the National Labor
Relations Act, the Board has delegated its powers in connection with
these cases to a three-member panel [Chairman McCulloch and
Members Brown and Jenkins].
The Board has reviewed the rulings of the Trial Examiner made
at the hearing and finds that no prejudicial error was committed.
The rulings are hereby affirmed. The Board has considered the
entire record in these cases, including the Trial Examiner's Supple-
mental Decision and the exceptions and brief, and hereby adopts the
findings, conclusions, and recommendations of the Trial Examiner,
with the following additions and modifications.
1. We agree with the Trial Examiner that Brendan Coughlin did
not willfully incur a loss of earnings by quitting his job with, Marine
Transport Lines in January 1964. As noted, on November 19, 1963,
the Court of Appeals handed down its decision enforcing the Board's
Order based on its decision finding that the Respondent had discrim-
inated against four of its employees, including Coughlin. At that
time, Coughlin was on board a ship employed as a seaman. Cough-
lin returned to the United States on January 9, 1964, and learned
of the court's decision. He then "signed off" the ship, informing
the ship's purser of the court's reinstatement decree and that he
would probably be reinstated during the next month. At the same
time, Shephard took the 60-day vacation with pay which he had
earned in the 71/2 months during which he had been at sea .3 On
February 1, 1964, Coughlin received a letter from the Respondent
offering him reinstatement, and on February 8 Coughlin mailed a
reply, accepting the Respondent's offer. However, the Respondent
subsequently notified Coughlin that he would not be reinstated since
he had failed to accept the Company's offer within the time allowed .4
Coughlin then sought further employment by going to the union
hiring hall and, during the first and second quarters of 1964, he
worked for Transamerican Steamship Co. and Moore-McCormack
Lines.
In view of the foregoing and particularly as Coughlin "signed
off" his ship on January 9 because he anticipated receiving an offer
of reinstatement from the Respondent, as Coughlin while awaiting
3 According to Coughlin 's uncontradicted testimony , it would be normal maritime prac-
tice for a seaman to take his accrued vacation after he has been at sea for a considerable
period of time.
* The Trial Examiner found , and we agree , that Coughlin had made a timely acceptance
of the Respondent 's offer of reinstatement ; that the Respondent was not justified in
rejecting Coughlin's acceptance ; and that the Respondent therefore has not fulfilled its
reinstatement obligation to Coughlin . Accordingly , we reaffirm our original order direct-
ing that the Respondent offer to Coughlin immediate and full reinstatement to his former
or substantially equivalent position . We further find that the backpay due Coughlin shall
continue to accrue until the Respondent fulfills its reinstatement obligation toward him.
MIAMI COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 1703
such offer was on paid-vacation status, and in the absence of evi-
dence that Coughlin thereafter failed to make diligent search for
work after he learned about 4 weeks later that he would not be rein-
stated by the Respondent, we find, in agreement with the Trial
Examiner, that Coughlin did not incur a willful loss of earnings
which would be offset against his gross backpay.
2. We find merit in the Respondent's exceptions to the Trial Exam-
iner's finding that Robert W. Shephard did not incur a willful loss
of earnings by quitting his job with Seaboard Beverages in
September 1963.
As described more fully in the Trial Examiner's Supplemental
Decision, after Shephard was discharged, he was first employed by
Automotive Delivery Service on November 14, 1962. He voluntarily
left his job on December 19, 1962, for various reasons, including the
fact that he was not getting paid for certain time he had worked
and he was being asked to break the law.' In December 1962, after
briefly working at Home Milk Producers, Shepherd obtained employ-
ment at Ready Potatoes, Inc. He left his job on February 9, 1963,
on the ground that he was given insufficient time to "check in" after
making deliveries. We agree with the Trial Examiner that Shep-
hard was not warranted in quitting this job and that the loss of
interim earnings which he incurred at Ready Potatoes from the time
of his quitting until his next employment at Seaboard Beverages
should be deducted from his gross backpay. Shepherd worked for
Seaboard Beverages as a driver salesman on a commission basis from
April 5, 1963, until about September 5, 1963. Shepherd testified
that he quit his job at Seaboard because, under the existing condi-
tions, he could not properly run his route; that his truck ran hot,
requiring frequent stops for water; that the company failed to pro-
vide a sufficient quantity of merchandise for the route's needs; and
that this held down his commission earnings. However, Shepherd's
earnings at Seaboard Beverages averaged in excess of $85 per week
during the second quarter of 1963 and increased to an average of
$107.85 per week during the third quarter of 1963; and these third
quarter earnings were greater than Shephard's earnings on any of
his three previous jobs, two of which he had also voluntarily termi-
nated, one without justification, and were almost equal to his base
pay with the Respondent. In these circumstances, we find that
Shepherd was not justified in quitting his job at Seaboard Bever-
ages. We shall, therefore, recompute Shephard's net backpay to
reflect the voluntary loss of interim earnings Shephard incurred
from the period of time he terminated his employment at Seaboard
5 The Trial Examiner found, and we agree, that Shephard was justified in leaving the
job at Automotive.
1704 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
Beverages until his reinstatement on February 10, 1964,6 and shall
deduct that sum from his gross backpay. We find that the correct
net backpay due Shephard is $7,421.58.
3. In his Supplemental Decision, in conformity with the stipula-
tion of the parties at the hearing, the Trial Examiner awarded Ralph
Gonzalez backpay in the sum of $4,000. The Trial Examiner also
awarded Gonzalez interest at 6 percent per annum on each of the
quarterly sums found due Gonzalez from the end of each calendar
year. However, the parties had also stipulated that the amount of
interest due Gonzalez was $240. As no good cause appears for not
honoring this stipulation of the parties, we shall award Gonzalez
backpay in the sum of $4,000 together with interest in the amount
of $240.
ORDER
On the basis of the foregoing Supplemental Decision and Order
and the entire record in this case, the National Labor Relations
Board hereby orders that the Respondent, Miami Coca-Cola Bottling
Company, Miami, Florida, its officers, agents, successors, and
assigns, shall pay to the employees involved in this proceeding, as
net backpay, the amounts specified as due in the Appendix to this
Supplemental Decision and Order. The net backpay specified as due
to Brendan Coughlin is determined at this time for the period
through June 30, 1964. The Regional Director shall provide back-
pay specifications for Coughlin for the period of time from June 30,
1964, until such time as the Respondent fulfills its reinstatement
obligation toward him.
9 After he quit his job at Seaboard Beverages , Shephard obtained sporadic employment
on a day-to -day basis with Jimmy Dico at a lower rate of pay.
APPENDIX
LIST OF CLAIMANTS AND AMOUNTS OF BACKPAY DUE
Donald Elgie (excluding interest) ---------------------- $2, 518.63
Ralph Gonzalez (including interest)------------------- 45240.00
Brendan Coughlin (net backpay through June 30, 1964,
excluding interest) ---------- 8,747.28
Robert W. Shephard
Pursuant to Section 2 of the Supplemental Decision and Order
herein, an offset against Shephard's gross backpay for quitting Sea-
board Beverages without justifiable reason is computed for a period
from.September 6, 1963,1 until he was reinstated on February 10, 1964.
1 The record indicates that Shephard worked at Seaboard Beverages until on or about
September 5, 1963.
MIAMI COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 1705
The offset is computed on the basis of $107.65 per week which repre-
sents Shephard's average weekly earnings during the last quarter he
was employed by Seaboard Beverages.
Period Interim earnings
Gross Net
backpay backpay
Year Quarter Gross Deductible Net
expense
1961-9/5-12/31---- -------------- IV -------- $1,407.36 $210 . 00 $0.00 $210. 00 $1,197.36
Safe Driving Award---- -------- ------------ ------------ ---------- -------------- ---------- 100.00
I---------- 1,476.54 110 . 00 31 . 00 79 . 00 1,397.54
1962----------------------------- II --------- 1,476 . 54 80 . 00 31.00 49 . 00 1,427.54
III -------- 1,476.54 0.00 31 . 00 0.00 1 , 476.54
IV-------- 1,476. 54 855.25 31.00 824 . 25 652.29
I---------- 1,524 . 69 1,127.10 0.00 1,127 . 10 397.59
1963---------------------- ------- 11 --------- 1,524 . 69 1,093.61 18.72 1,074 . 89 449.80
III -------- 1,524.69 1, 420 . 85 14.40 1, 406.45 118.24
IV-------- 1,524 . 69 1,420 . 85 0.00 1,420 . 85 103.84
1964-1/1-2/10----- -------------- I---------- 703.68 602.84 0.00 602 . 84 100.84
Total net packpay due
(excluding interest) ----- ------------ ------------ ---------- -------------- ---------- 7,421.58
TRIAL EXAMINER'S SUPPLEMENTAL DECISION
This supplemental proceeding is solely for the purpose of determining the amounts
of backpay due certain employees under a prior Board Decision and Order' as
enforced by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on November 19, 1963.2
A hearing was held before Trial Examiner Benjamin B. Lipton in Miami, Florida,
on June 15 and 16 and August 5, 1964. All parties were represented and participated
in the hearing , and were afforded opportunity to argue orally on the record, which
they waived . Respondent filed briefs and General Counsel sent in letters in lieu of
formal briefs ,3 all of which have been duly considered.
Upon the entire record in the case , and from my observation of the witnesses,
including their demeanor on the stand, I make the following findings and conclusions:
A. Stipulations and amendments of backpay specification
The Regional Director 's backpay specification , issued April 4, 1964, was effectively
amended , inter alia, to reflect stipulations at the hearing as to (1) the gross backpay
formula affecting all four claimants ; 4 (2) Respondent 's reinstatement of Gonzalez
i In the unfair labor practice proceeding , Respondent was found to have discriminatorily
discharged Brendan Coughlin , Donald Elgie , Ralph Gonzalez , and Robert W.. Shephard,
in violation of Section 8(a) (3) and ( 1) of the Act , and, in remedy , Respondent was
ordered to offer these four employees immediate and full reinstatement to their former
or substantially equivalent positions , and make them whole for any loss of pay they
may have suffered by reason of the discrimination against them , with interest at 6 percent
per annum , the computation of backpay to be made on a quarterly basis in accordance
with the Board 's customary policy.
a Miami Coca-Cola Bottling Company , 138 NLRB 1209 , enfd. 324 F . 2d 501 (C.A. 5).
s The nature of this backpay proceeding, including the stipulations and modifications
affecting the backpay specification , the necessary recomputations , the various issues
raised, and the absence of oral argument, is such that a thoroughgoing brief by the
General Counsel, while not made compulsory , was particularly to be desired.
I The agreed-upon formula used as a abase rate of pay the annual income of each
complainant prior to his discharge , and added thereto a 5-percent increment for each
succeeding year during the backpay period to the point of a "plateau ," or maximum gross
pay rate, which was fixed as the 1960 annual income of Coughlin , in the amount of
$6,098.79, or about $117 .28 a week. Under the formula , the pay rate of Coughlin
remains unchanged , while the pay rate of Elgie ( reinstated in 1964 ), after the yearly
increments , does not reach the "plateau."
783-133-66-vol. 151-109
1706 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and Shephard to their former jobs on February 10, 1964; 5 and (3) the net interim
earnings of Elgie and Gonzalez, thereby eliminating all further issues regarding the
net backpay due these two claimants.
B. Issues
As a result of the agreements reached at the hearing, the remaining issues, which
were litigated, involve: 6
1. Coughlin's right to reinstatement and further backpay in view of his alleged
untimely acceptance of Respondent's offer of employment in February 1964.
2. Specific questions relating to interim earnings and expenses of Coughlin and
Shephard.
3. Broad contentions that Coughlin and Shephard failed at various times in the
backpay period to make diligent search for employment, and willfully incurred loss
of earnings.
C. Brendan Coughlin
1. The reinstatement offer
On November 19, 1963, as noted, the Fifth Circuit handed down its decision 7
enforcing the Board's Order, which required, inter alia, that Respondent offer imme-
diate reinstatement to Coughlin. At the time, Coughlin held interim employment
as a seaman with a steamship line and was away at sea. About January 9, 1964, he
returned to the United States and was apprised of the court's decision. He signed
off the ship and received vacation pay for 60 days beginning January 10, 1964.8
On February 1, 1964, Coughlin received at a New Jersey residence the following
letter, mailed by Respondent on January 29, 1964:
January 28, 1964.
Mr. BRENDAN COUGHLIN
33 Washington Avenue
West Caldwell, New Jersey
Dear Sir: In conformance with an order of the United States Circuit Court
of Appeals, you are hereby offered reinstatement to your former, or substantially
equivalent position which you held when discharged by Miami Coca-Cola
Bottling Company.
Please notify the undersigned within 10 days of your decision, in writing, to
accept reinstatement with our company.
In the event we have not heard from you in 10 days, we shall assume that you
do not desire reinstatement.
Your early advice is appreciated so that the necessary arrangements can be
made.
Very truly yours,
COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY OF MIAMI
(S) George C. Bell
GEORGE C. BELL, Vice President.
s The original backpay specification computed backpay for Gonzalez and Shephard on a
current basis only through the fourth quarter of 1963 and alleged that backpay continued
thereafter. Respecting Coughlin, the specification contains the same allegation of con-
tinuing backpay, as to which an issue is presented, infra. Respondent's backpay obliga-
tion to Elgie is fully liquidated in the specification, which computes his net backpay to the
date of his reinstatement on February 7, 1964.
9 The original backpay specification contains certain collateral allegations (in para-
graphs 2-5) to the effect that Respondent failed to fulfill its obligation under the en-
forced Order to offer the discriminatees immediate reinstatement and to make available
to the Board records to facilitate checking the amounts of backpay due. Having heard
nothing further thereon from the General Counsel, these allegations are assumed to have
been abandoned.
7 The court's decree was formally entered on December 13, 1963.
8 Coughlin testified that he told the purser (presumably his supervisor on ship) that
he would take his vacation and accept an offer of reinstatement from Respondent which
he expected within the next month.
MIAMI COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 1707
On February 8, Coughlin mailed his reply, which Respondent received on Febru-
ary 10, as follows:
33 Washington Avenue
West Caldwell, N.J.
February 8, 1964
Mr. GEORGE C. BELL, Vice President
COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY OF MIAMI
301 N. W. 29th Street
Miami 27, Florida
Dear Mr. Bell: This is to inform you that I hereby accept the offer of rein-
statement to the Miami Coca-Cola Bottling Co. made to me in your letter of
January 28 . The reinstatement is to my former position in the company, or to
a substantially equivalent position.
Since I am now making preparations to move it will be a week or ten days
from this writing before I shall arrive in Miami.
If you have any instructions as to when or where I should report , I can be
reached at the above address.
Yours truly,
Thereafter, Coughlin received the following letter:
Brendan Coughlin
February 19, 1964
Mr. BRENDAN COUGHLIN
284 N. W. 46th Street
Miami , Florida
Dear Mr. Coughlin: Since you failed to accept the company's offer of rein-
statement within the time allowed , you will not be reinstated as offered. Our
letter of January 28, 1964 was very specific that you should notify us in writing
within ten (10) days. The offer expired on February 7, 1964, ten (10) days
later.
The post office's return receipt indicated that you received our letter on Feb-
ruary 1, 1964. Thus you had ample and sufficient time to communicate your
decision to us within the stated time limit, but you failed and declined to take
the necessary action to accept the offer.
Very truly yours,
COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY OF MIAMI
(S) George C. Bell
GEORGE C. BELL, Vice President.
Respondent's position is that the 10 days which it gave Coughlin to accept its rein-
statement offer commenced from the date of its offering letter of January 28. The
offering letter refers to "within 10 days" and "in 10 days" but fails to state from which
date they are to be calculated. In this respect, the letter is ambiguous. The letter
was not mailed until January 29 and not received until February 1. Not unreason-
ably, Coughlin could have construed the limitation period as running from the date
of his receipt of the offer, and acting thereon sent in his timely acceptance. Respond-
ent had unlawfully discharged Coughlin, almost 3 years before, and it was now under
court and Board mandate to remedy the wrong it visited upon Coughlin by restoring
him to his job, if he desired it, with backpay. Particularly in this . context,,Coughlin's
reinstatement rights should not lightly be forfeited upon a technical ground. While
Respondent was entitled "to know where it stood" 9 and to place a reasonable time
limit upon its reinstatement offer, it was nevertheless bound at the least to state the
terms of the offer to Coughlin with unmistakable clarity. This, I find, it failed to do
It is held therefore that Respondent had not fulfilled its reinstatement obligation nor
tolled its backpay liability to Coughlin,1° (which continues beyond June 30, 1964,
computed in the amended specification). (See Appendix A.)
9 Cf. White Sulphur Springs Co. v. N.L R B., 316 F. 2d 410 (C A.D C).
10 It is unnecessary to pass upon whether, in all the circumstances, the reinstatement
offer was actually to be held open for a reasonable time, even if Respondent had clearly
indicated to Coughlin that he had 10 days from January 28 in which to accept the offer
Cf Cetszen'8 Hotel Company, d/b/a Texas Hotel, 131 NLRB 834, 835, enfd 313 F 2d
708 (CA. 5)
1708 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
2. Motion for continuance
At the original hearing dates on June 15 and 16, 1964, Coughlin was again work-
ing on board ship at sea and unavailable to testify . The hearing was then concluded
with the understanding that the parties would attempt to arrive at stipulations con-
cerning, among other things , the net backpay due Coughlin , to be submitted and
included in the record after the close. Sometime in July, Coughlin returned to the
United States, and upon motion of the General Counsel , the hearing was resumed
on August 5, 1964, to take Coughlin's testimony. At this hearing, the General Coun-
sel was permitted to introduce an amended backpay specification on Coughlin which
presented up-to-date computations as a result of stipulations and also added claims
for the first and second quarters of 1964 . Respondent asserted "surprise" in that it
had no prior notice of the data in the specification covering the two quarters of 1964,
although it was aware of the allegation that Coughlin 's backpay was continuing
beyond the original specification . After full argument and exploration of the circum-
stances,11 Respondent's objections and motion for continuance for at least 2 weeks to
permit it to investigate the facts alleged in the extended specification were denied,
with the following reservation stated by me:
. If during the course of Mr. Coughlin's testimony some particular informa-
tion should come to your attention , Mr. Bowden , . . . I will hear you on a
request for sufficient reasonable time . . . to check out this particular informa-
tion, if you are suddenly surprised by a significant development , but apart from
that ... if you should check out after the close of this hearing again and discover
information which in your opinion would render unreliable or show up to be
sharply in conflict with the evidence that was taken here on any significant mat-
ters, I would hear from you after the close of the hearing and would strongly
suggest that , at that time , you get together ... and try to arrive at a stipulation
on such additional information.
During Coughlin 's testimony and the remainder of the hearing, no such request was
made by Respondent for time to investigate any particular matter. At the conclu-
sion of the hearing, I repeated the statement regarding submissions after the close
of any matters which might be discovered upon further investigation , and Respond-
ent requested and was granted sufficient time in filing a brief to allow it to conduct
"some investigation."
In its brief , Respondent alleged no additional evidence and made no offer of fur-
ther proof. However, it moved that "the entire hearing should be set aside and
another hearing held on discriminatee Coughlin with sufficient advance notice to
Respondent to allow it to prepare for said hearing." Particularly in view of the
circumstances related above, and considering the nature of the backpay proceeding,
the motion is denied as without merit.
3. Coughlin's interim employment and earnings
Respondent raises various contentions to eliminate or reduce the amounts of
Coughlin's net backpay on grounds that he failed to exercise due diligence in seeking
and holding interim employment , e.g., because ( a) his earnings for certain periods
were "incredibly low"; (b) he refused to "lower his sights" when he was unable to
obtain work through private employment agencies at the minimum salary he indi-
cated; (c) he failed to pursue available opportunities for employment; and (d) he
quit employment without justification . Respondent also contests expense allowances
for "union dues" and the failure to include certain "supplemental employment" as
deductible interim earnings.
Coughlin had been discharged by Respondent on March 1, 1961, at which time
his average weekly earnings were $117.28. He was unable to obtain employment
until early May 1961, when he was taken on as an organizer with the Charging Party,
Teamsters Local 138, earnings at the start $50 per week, and raised in July to $75.12
"'Including the fact that Coughlin was actually in employment at sea or on paid
vacation during the major part of this 6-month period.
' Coughlin testified that the Teamsters told him that , while it could not afford another
organizer , it would put him on salary to work when needed and allow him to use 2 or 3
hours a day to seek other employment . Under these terms, he continued his search for
other work , at least into the third quarter of 1961. He stated that , on an average, he
worked at the Teamsters ' job 8 hours a day, 5 days a week.
MIAMI COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 1709
This employment ceased about February 1962. In mid-July 1962, he obtained his
first seafaring job out of New York and thereafter continued in this type of work
with various steamship companies throughout the backpay period. During the entire
year of 1963, his net interim earnings at such employment eclipsed the amount of
gross backpay he would have earned with Respondent.
Respondent adverts to the first two quarters in each of the years 1961 and 1962 as
the periods of "incredibly low" earnings 13 during which, it contends, Coughlin should
not receive any backpay. It also introduced photostatic copies of "help wanted"
advertisements in the Miami Herald for certain periods in 1961 to 1963,14 purportedly
to show the availability of the type of work (route salesman) the discriminatees
Coughlin and Shephard had performed for Respondent.
Coughlin credibly testified of his search for work in the periods intervening his
actual employment. On the day after his discharge, he registered with the Florida
State Employment Service, herein called FSES. Thereafter, at least weekly, until
early June 1961, he reported at FSES or called 15 regarding employment. He filed
applications with, and continually contacted, several private employment agencies;
responded to newspaper want ads; and independently visited various companies in the
Miami area.16 Excepting the employment above described, he was not offered a job
at any of the companies to which he was referred or at which he applied.
Following his departure from the Teamsters job in 1962, he resumed the same
manner of search for work, without success. While in Miami, he sought maritime
employment and was advised that the best opportunity for such work was afforded in
New York. In April 1962 he moved to the New York area, and while also looking
for other employment as he specified, he began "shaping up" daily at the National
Maritime Union hiring halls until he finally obtained a seaman's job in July. In the
first quarter of 1964, after Respondent's refusal to reinstate him, he shipped out again
with another steamship line.
Coughlin was told by interviewers at the FSES and private employment agencies
that his situation appeared "hopeless," because Respondent, when called, refused or
failed to recommend him or give out information concerning his employment with
that firm.
It is a settled principle in a backpay proceeding that the General Counsel has the
burden only of showing the gross amounts of backpay due, and thereafter the respond-
ent, as the established wrongdoer, has the burden of proving "facts which would
negative the existence of liability to a given employee or which would mitigate that
liability." 17
"Incredibly Low" Earnings
Respondent's contentions based upon alleged "incredibly low" earnings are rejected.
I am unaware that the Board has at any time espoused such doctrine as urged by
Respondent-which in effect indulges in a presumption from the mere fact of unem-
ployment or low earnings that a discriminatee willfully incurred idleness or failed
to make a diligent search for work. Respondent, having the burden of proof, failed
to show neglect or any absence of good-faith effort on Coughlin's part, and indeed the
positive evidence in the record establishes quite the contrary,18 that at all relevant
18 His gross interim earnings in 1961 (first quarter) were none ; in 1961 (second quarter),
$425; In 1962 (first quarter), $300; and in 1962 (second quarter), none.
14 Covering 43 days in 1961, 23 in 1962, and 8 in 1963.
15 An FSES official noted a telephone number on Coughlin's identification card and asked
him to call, which he did regularly.
11 Coughlin's testimony was fairly specific as to names, places, and dates ; a report of
his employment and unemployment history which he filed with the Board on July 25,
1962, is consistent with his testimony.
17 E.g., Unsted States Air Conditioning Corporation, 141 NLRB 1278, 1280, and court
cases cited therein.
12 The short and decisive appraisal of the voluminous newspaper ads introduced by
Respondent is that, whatever their work in the circumstances here, as a matter of evidence
they are substantially overcome by Coughlin's direct testimony, with documentary cor-
roboration. E.g., M. J. McCarthy Motor Sales Co., 147 NLRB 605, at footnote 6. How-
ever, much more may be detracted from this exhibit. The conditions subsequent upon
which the exhibit was received by me, over objection of the General Counsel,
were virtually unmet by Respondent, viz: "Now, Mr. Bowden, that is quite an ex-
hibit and if you expect me and the Board to go searching through that exhibit to
reach a judgment that all these jobs were available, I don't think I can do it on the
basis of this general type of offer. You would have to be very specific as to which ad
on which date you are referring , and to indicate that in some way, directly or with a
1710 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
times Coughlin was diligent and persevering in his quests for employment-19 More-
over, it is sufficiently evident that Coughlin's lack of success in the Miami area is
attributable in some part to Respondent's own refusals to supply references or employ-
ment information concerning him.20
Lowering Sights
Coughlin had already "lowered his sights" by about $40 a week when he noted a
minimum salary of $75-80 in his applications at the private employment agencies.
At less than this figure he had earlier accepted 9 months' employment with the Team-
sters. There is no showing that he turned down any suitable employment at a lower
salary. In any view of the facts or law, Respondent's argument in effect that he
should have further lowered his sights is wholly without warrant.
Union Dues as an Expense
For the period of Coughlin's employment with the Teamsters, the backpay specifica-
tion deducted from interim earnings an expense item of $5 a month for union dues.
Respondent, with merit, objects. Coughlin was an adherent of the Teamsters (which
indeed was the cause of his discharge by Respondent) before he was given a job as
organizer in May 1961. Perhaps, as a practical matter, he was expected to maintain
his union membership during such employment. But it cannot be held, at least under
the facts here, that such union dues were a compulsory and legitimate expense of
employment 21 Accordingly, the union dues claimed for the period of his employ-
ment with Teamsters will appropriately be deleted as expenses in the backpay com-
putation. However, the registration fees, amounting to $60, for use of the NMU
hiring halls in three quarters of 1961 are recognized charges for such services,22 and
therefore allowable expenses. Similarly, although the sums of $30 for each of the
first two quarters in 1964 are earmarked "union dues" in the specification, Coughlin
testified without contradiction that a nonunion seaman would have to pay the iden-
tical charges for hiring hall and related services, as indeed Coughlin himself initially
paid before he exercised the option to join that union 23
Supplemental Income
During his employment with the Teamsters (in 1964 (fourth quarter) and 1962
(first quarter)) at the $75 salary, which, as noted, entailed a full 8-hour day and 5-day
week, Coughlin undertook casual part-time employment in taxicab driving at varying
hours from 5 p.m. to 4 a.m., at which he earned in commissions $46.44 and $95.72
over a period of about 6 weeks. As the evidence shows that this was indeed supple-
mental earnings for employment held outside Coughlin's full working hours for the
Teamsters, they were properly reported but not deducted from gross backpay under
the specification.24
reasonable relation, this witness had access to this ad, it was available to him and
he deliberately, neglectfully refused or failed to follow up this particular ad which was
within the line of employment that he was seeking. . . . Mr Bowden indicated that he
would make specific arguments in his brief, pointing to specific situations at specific
times that show a direct relation to the issues involved. On that basis I will admit this
general exhibit . . .11
Furthermore, many of the ads encircled by Respondent (apart from being almost
illegible) were clearly for unrelated or unsuitable fobs ; were vague in significant respects ,
or were repetitious from day to day. Finally, the fact that a claimant fails to exhaust
every job possibility would not operate ipso facto to disquality him from backpay
entitlement, the test being whether, all factors considered, he made a good -faith effort.
Mastro Plastics Corporation, at at ., 136 NLRB 1342, 1359. Coughlin clearly satisfied
this test.
19 See, e.g. Ozark Hardwood Company, 119 NLRB 130; Biown and Root, Inc., et at.,
132 NLRB 486; W. C. Nabors, d/b/a W. C. Nabors Company, 134 NLRB 1078, Bonnar-
Vawter, Inc., 135 NLRB 1270; M. J. McCarthy Motor Sales Co., supra
20 See Moss Planing Mill Co., 119 NLRB 1733, 1740.
2x West Texas Utilities Company, Inc., 109 NLRB 936, 938.
22 See N.L R B. v Houston Maritime Assn, et at., 337 F 2d 333 (C A. 5), and cases
there cited in footnote 10.
29 Ibid.
24 See Phelps Dodge Corp. V. N L R.B., 313 U.S. 177, 198, footnote 7 citing Pusey, Haynes
cE Breish Company, 1 NLRB 482, 486 See also Link-Belt Company, 12 NLRB 854, 872 ;
Acme Mattress Company, Inc., 97 NLRB 1439, 1443. It appears that Coughlin had sup-
MIAMI COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 1711
The Alleged Quit
Respondent contends that Coughlin quit his particular maritime job on January 9,
1964, upon his return to the United States, thereby willfully incurring loss of earnings
which were eclipsing his gross backpay. The circumstances preceding and following
his return from sea on this date have already been described, supra. Clearly, the
record evidence is that Coughlin did not voluntarily terminate his particular maritime
job, but rather that he signed off ship and took 60-day paid vacation, which is normal
practice following an extended period at sea. In any event, as he first learned at such
time of the court decree requiring his reinstatement, his actions in anticipation of an
employment offer from Respondent were fully justified.
D. Robert W. Shephard
Shephard was discharged on October 5, 1961, and reinstated on Febraury 10, 1964.
As deiived from the parties' agreement,25 his base rate of pay with Respondent was
about $113 a week.
Shephard gave uncontradicted and credible testimony of his employment search
and of the interim jobs he held until his reinstatement by Respondent.26 On October 6,
1961, he registered with the FSES to seek employment and to begin receiving
unemployment compensation. About weekly thereafter until mid-March 1962, he
personally reported at the FSES employment office regarding his compensation claims
and at the same or other times in search of a job.27 In addition, he was given a tele-
phone number by FSES agents to call in for job referrals in lieu of appearing per-
sonally, and he made such telephone calls. His sources of search included newspaper
advertisements. Shephard specified numerous places and employers during the
backpay period where he sought employment, unsuccessfully, in his field of work of
general driving and selling. Among other things, the fact that FSES referred
Shephard to only three employers while he was an active applicant in the course of
over 3 years is indicative of a scarcity of job opportunities in the Miami area for
Shephard's line of work.28
Travel Expense in Leaving the City
In the fourth quarter of 1964, the specification deducts from interim earnings an
expense item of $100.45 covering "gas and lodging" in connection with "seeking work
in Columbus, Ga." Three or four days after his discharge by Respondent, Shephard
elemental employment during his tenure with Respondent by working at the Orange Bowl
during the football season, although he had no similar cab-driving earnings before or
since the 6-week period in 1961 (second quarter) The important fact shown is that
the items in question here were indeed "moonlight" earnings and not properly a part of
regular interim employment.
25 Respondent agreed to the accuracy of adjusted computations by the General Counsel
of the amounts of gross backpay and interim earnings, as shown in the attached Ap-
pendix B. However, for the reasons noted and treated below, it disputes the net backpay
claimed in the amended specification.
sa Also in evidence are his FSES identification cards during the backpay period and
a form he filed with the Board on July 12, 1962, on which he reported his interim em-
ployment and unemployment history to that date.
27 A stipulation was admitted which describes the results of an examination of Shephard's
employment application made at the FSES offices on June 17, 1964, by the parties to-
gether with an FSES representative. The advice received was that referrals for employ-
ment were made only from an active file ; that an applicant must report to FSES once
each month to maintain his active application ; and that the application is removed from
the active file 1 month after the last contact by the applicant. Shephard's application
at the FSES indicated that it was in the active file during the following periods: Octo-
ber 12 to November 12, 1961; March to June 17, 1962; August 13, 1962, to January 17,
1963 ; February 27 to March 27, 1963 ; and September 11 to October 11, 1963. His ap-
plication also shows that he was referred by FSES to three employers, respectively in
October 1961, February 1963, and September 1963, but was not hired.
The FSES representative admitted that not all applicants and FSES personnel "followed
all procedures to the letter." And he identified the FSES agent who Shephard testified
had written her name and telephone number on his FSES identification caid and told
him to telephone her about job availability instead of reporting personally.
28Ibid. Similarly, an FSES official testified that, in October 1963, there were 8 or 9
orders received at FSES for routemen , and that "usually" about 75 applications were on
file for such jobs.
1712 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
and his wife drove in their private car to Columbus, a distance of about 650 miles,
where they remained for 3 days and then returned to Miami. In Columbus, he had
reported to the FSES office and also made application for work at several companies.
One of the reasons for the trip to Columbus was to afford Shephard and his wife an
opportunity to visit with their respective families residing in this city. Also part of
his motivation apparently was that, as he testified, he had not received from Respond-
ent the vacation which was due him. While the trip to Columbus was not a lapse in
Shephard's continuous search for employment, the expense of this trip should not be
borne by Respondent, as sufficient reason has not been shown for leaving the Miami
area only 3 or 4 days after his discharge 29 The expense of $100.45 will therefore be
disallowed.
Quitting of Interim Employment
During the fourth quarter of 1961, and the first two quarters of 1962, Shephard
performed casual and part-time work, about 40 days at $10 a day, for a freelance
carpetlayer (Mickey Killen).30
On November 14, 1962, he obtained his first regular employment with Automotive
Delivery Service, and thereafter had a series of other jobs (see Appendix B). He
voluntarily left Automotive on December 19, 1962, because he was not getting paid
for certain time that he worked, "was driving defective trucks, no brakes, no license
tags, no lights at night," and "was asked to break the law." On this evidence, I find
that Shephard, by quitting his job, had not incurred a willful loss of earnings.
In December 1962, after leaving Automotive, Shephard held a job for about a
week at Home Milk Producers, and then was asked to leave because the company's
repeated efforts to obtain employment information about him from Respondent were
unavailing 31 Clearly, there was no unjustified quit involved here.
From late December 1962 until he voluntarily terminated his employment on
February 9, 1963, Shephard worked as a routeman for Ready Potatoes, Inc., at $1.58
an hour, plus overtime. Routemen were required, after making their deliveries for
the day, to "check in" their merchandise and receipts and were allowed 30-minutes
paid time to perform such function. Shephard testified that he was unable to do this
paper work in 30 minutes and he had "never seen a guy check up in that time." The
apparent reason he quit was because he was not compensated for the time he used in
excess of 30 minutes. A vice president of Ready Potatoes testified that most drivers,
when new, have difficulty "checking in" but that the average driver took 15 to 20
minutes in this work. He knew that Shephard had difficulty checking in and usually
took longer than the 30 minutes allotted. He said that Shephard gave no notice and
no reason for leaving, and that the company had received a message that Shephard
left town because of a death in the family. Shephard was unemployed for about 2
months thereafter. Considering the time elapsed since his discharge and his inability
since then to secure regular suitable employment, I find, in the circumstances, that
Shephard was not warranted in quitting his job. He thereby voluntarily caused a loss
of interim earnings, which will be deducted from his gross backpay until his next
employment (at a higher rate of pay) with Seaboard Beverages.32
Shephard worked for Seaboard as a driver salesman solely on a commission basis
from April 5 until September 1963 when he quit. The reasons he left, as he testified
without contradiction, were that the company-"wouldn't fix the truck which was
running hot. I put water in one truck 18 times. They couldn't give me the proper
merchandise that I needed for the day's work . . . you needed 20 cases and they'd give
you 4 cases and expected you to run a route on it." In view of such testimony, I
cannot hold that Shephard was without good cause in leaving the job.
Alleged Willful Idleness and Lack of Due Diligence in Search for Work
Essentially for the same reasons described, supra, with respect to Coughlin,
Respondent's contentions of "failure to lower sights" and "incredibly low" earnings,
including its reliance upon newspaper advertisements, are rejected 33
20 See W. C. Nabors, d/b/a W. C. Nabors Company, 134 NLRB 1078, 1094.
90 Shephard did the same type of work at other intervals in the backpay period-25 days
for Mickey Killen in the fourth quarter of 1962, and about 54 days with Jimmy Dico in
latter 1963 and early 1964.
31 Cf Moss Planing Mill Company, 119 NLRB 1733, 1740
32 See W. C. Nabors, d/b/a W. C. Nabors Co. v. N.L.R.B., 323 F. 2d 686, 693 (C.A. 5).
33 See M. J. McCarthy Motor Sales Company, supra.
MIAMI COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 1713
Safety Award
It was stipulated, viz.: Respondent's practice was to give a safety award each year
to a driver who completed the year without accident. The first year that a driver
would qualify he would receive $25, the second year $50, and the third year $75.
After the fourth consecutive year, and for each year thereafter, he would receive
an award of $100, paid after the close of the calendar year. Before his discharge,
Shephard had arrived at the $100 plateau. If he had remained in Respondent's
employ for the full calendar year 1961, and his safety record for October, November,
and December of 1961 equalled that of his predischarge period, he would have quali-
fied for the $100 award for 1961.
The original backpay specification for Shephard contains as a final item an amount
of $100 designated "Five-year safe-driving award." There is no further elucidation of
the stipulation or of the specification. Apparently the $100 award is claimed by the
General Counsel solely for the year 1961. No reason was indicated why the safety
award was not claimed for the remainder of the backpay period as to Shephard, or
at all for any of the three other claimants who held the same job as Shephard. On
this state of the record, the safety award will be considered only as claimed in the
specification, and allowed as incentive earnings 34 in the sum of $100 for the year
1961.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Upon the basis of the foregoing findings, and the entire record in the case, it is
concluded that the employees named below are entitled to backpay in the amounts
listed opposite their names,35 with interest at 6 percent per annum on each of the
quarterly sums found due herein from the end of each calendar quarter,36 less the
tax withholding required by Federal and State laws.
Donald Elgie ---------------------------------------- $2, 518.63
Ralph Gonzalez --------------------------------------- 374,000.00
Brendan Coughlin------------------------------------- 8,747.28
Robert W.Shephard----------------------------------- 9,271.28
It is recommended that the Board adopt these findings and conclusions, and order
the Respondent, its officers, agents, successors, and assigns, to pay the sums indicated.
84 See Aerosonic Instrument Corp., 128 NLRB 412.
85 Detailed computations for Coughlin and Shephard are contained in Appendixes A
and B hereto.
88 Isis Plumbing & Heating Co., 138 NLRB 716.
87 The parties' stipulation of $240, to cover the required 6 percent interest is obviously
in error as the interest should be computed, under the Isis case, on a quarterly basis.
APPENDIX A
COUGHLIN, Brendan-SS 9103-28-1120.
(Route salesman in sales department)
Backpay period: From March 1, 1961, and continuing.
Net backpay computed: Through June 30, 1964.
Excepted periods- None.
Backpay computation by calendar quarters
1. Number of weeks: 4 4 in quarter ending 3/31/61; 13 in following quarters.
2. Weekly base rate of pay: $117.28.
3. Measure of quarterly gross backpay: Weekly base rate X 13.
Quarterly breakdown
1961-1 (from 3/1/61-4 .4 weeks)
Gross backpay (weekly base X 4 4) ------------------------------------------------ $515 28
Gross interim earnings---------------------------------------------- $0 00
Less Expenses (Excess mileage seeking work , $1 per day)----------- 20 00
Net interim earnings -------------------------------------------------------------- 0 00
Quarterly total------------------------------------------------------------------------- $51528
1714 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX A-Continued
1961-2
Gross backpay (weekly base X 13) --------------------------
Gross interim earnings (Teamsters Local 198, Miami) --------------- 425 00
Less Expenses (Excess mileage at $1 per day-approx. $60 00) -------- 60 00
1,524 69
Net interim earnings-------------------------------------------------------------- 365 00
Quarterly total-------- ------------------ -------------------------------------------- 1,159 69
1961-3
Gross backpay------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524 69
Gross interim earnings (Teamsters Local 198, Miami)--------------- 900 00
Less Expenses (see Expenses, 1961-2 above) ------------------------ 60 00
Net interim earnings--------------------------------------------------------------- 840 00
Quarterly total-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 684 69
1961-4
Gross backpay-------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524 69
Gross interim earnings (Teamsters Local 198, Miami) Ru-Kay Corp ,
Miami-$46 44--------------------------------------------------- 975 00
Less Expenses (see Expenses, 1961-2 above) ------------------------ 60 00
Net interim earnings----------------------------------------------------------- 915 00
Quarterly total-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 609 69
1962-1
Gross backpay--------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524 69
Gross interim earnings (Teamsters Local 198, Miami) E & B Corp,
Miami-about $95 72---------------------------------------------- 300 00
Less Expenses (see Expenses, 1961-2 above)------------------------ 60 00
Net interim earnings-------------------------------------------------------------- 240 00
Quarterly total------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,284.69
1962-2
Gross backpay--------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524 69
Gross interim earnings---------------------------------------------- 0.00
Less Expenses
Travel to New York, seeking work------------------ $60.00
Registration fee at NMU----------------------------- 10 00
Excess mileage, at $1 20 per day-45 days----------- 54 00
124 00
Net interim earnings--------------------------------------------------------------- 0 00
Quarterly total-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524.69
1962-3
Gross backpay---------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross interim earnings (United States Lines Co., New
1,524 69
York)------------------------------------------------------------ 535 22
Less Expenses
Excess mileage to hiring hall (21 days at $1.20) ------- 25.20
NMU registration fee-------------------------------- 25.00
50 20
Net interim earnings--------------------------------------------------------------- 485 02
Quarterly total-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,039.67
MIAMI COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 1715
APPENDIX A-Continued
4962-4
Gross backpay ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross interim earnings.
United States Lines, New York--------------------- 650 17
American Export Lines, New York------------------ 14 88
Less Expenses
Excess mileage (44 days at $1.20)--------------------- 52 80
NMU registration fee-------------------------------- 25 00
650.05
77.80
1,524.69
Net interim earnings--------------------------------------------------------------- 587.25
Quarterly total--------------------------------------------------------------------------
937 44
1963-1
Gross backpay--------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524 69
Gross interim earnings Marine Transport Lines, New York City,
for all of 1963-$6,799 51* prorated by Quarter-$1,700 00 ----------- 1,700 00
Less Expenses------------------------------------------------------ 0 00
Net interim earmngs-------- -------------------------------------------------------
1,700.00
Quarterly total-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 0 00
* Although the two 1963 W-2 forms from Marine Transport reflect a gross earning of
$7,108 57, the sum of $309 06 represents an overpayment, later reimbursed by Coughlin,
leaving a gross earning of $6,799.51, or $1,700 per quarter.
1963-2
Gross backpay--------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524 69
Gross interim earnings (Marine Transport Lines) ------------------- 1,700 00
Less Expenses---------------------------------------------------- 0 00
Net interim earnings-------------------------------------------------------------- 1,700 00
Quarterly total ---------------------------------------- ----------------------------- 0 00
1963-3
Gross backpay--------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524 69
Gross interim earnings (Marine Transport Lines)------------------- $1,700 00
Less Expenses
Union initiation fee__________________________________ 100 00
Union dues------------------------------------------ 25 00
125 00
Net interim earnings ------------------- ----------------------------------------- 1,575 00
Quarterly total-- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 0.00
1963-4
Gross baekpay --------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524 69
Gross interim earnings (Marine Transport Lines )------------------- 1,700 00
Less Expenses (Union dues)________________________________________ 25.00
Net interim earnings---------------------------------------------------- - 1,675 00
Quarterly total-- ------------------------------ ----------------------------- 0 00
1716 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX A-Continued
1964-1
Gross backpay ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross interim earnings:
Marine Transport Lines (to 1/9/64)------------------- 200 96
Vacation pay-------------------------------------- 650 58
Transamerican Steamship Co------------------------ 202 72
1, 054 26
Less Expenses:
Mileage---------------------------------------------- 8 40
Union dues (in lieu of service charges) --------------- 30 00
1,524 69
38.40
Net interim earnings--- ------------------------------------------------------------ 1,015 86
Quarterly total------------------------------------------------------------------------- 508.83
1964-2
Gross backpay---------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross interim earnings.
1,524 69
Trausamerican Steamship Co------------------------ 67 88
Moore McCormack---------------------------------- 1,015 00
1,082.88
Less Expenses:
Transportation (9 days at $120) ---------------------- 10 80
Union dues (in lieu of service charges)--------------- 30 00
40.80
Net interim earnings-------------------------------------------------------------- 1,042 08
Quarterly total------------------------------------------------------------------------- 482 61
Net backpay through June 30, 1964 (and continuing)------------------------------------ --8,747.28
** Not including interest at 6 percent , accumulative until backpay is paid.
APPENDIX B
SHEPHARD, Robert W.-SS 257-16-6978.
(Route salesman in sales department)
Backpay period: From October 5, 1961, to February 10, 1964 (reinstated).
Excepted periods: None.
Backpay computation by calendar quarters*
quarterly breakdown
1961-4
Gross backpay----------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross interim earnings (Mickey Killen, Miami)---------------------- 210.00
$1,407.36
Net interim earnings---------------------------------------------------------------- 210.00
Quarterly total-------- ------------------------------------------------------------------- $1,197.36
Safe driving award-1961----------------------------------------------------------------------- 100.00
1962-1
Gross backpay---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,476.54
Gross interim earnings (Mickey Killen, Miami)---------------------- 110 00
Less Expenses (10 gallons of gas in private auto per week** for 10
weeks-seeking work. Approx. $3100) ---------------------------- 31.00
Net interim earnings---------------------------------------------------------------- 79.00
Quarterly total--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,397.54
• Per stipulation on quarterly gross backpay and gross interim earnings , supra.
** In excess of gasoline required to drive to work with gross employer.
MIAMI COCA-COLA BOTTLING COMPANY 1717
APPENDIX B-Continued
196,E-t
Gross backpay ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,476 54
Gross interim earnings (Mickey Killen , Miami)---------------------- 80.00
Less Expenses (10 gallons of gas per week, seeking work or excess
mileage-10 weeks)------------------------------------------------ 31 00
Net interim earnings-------------------------------------- -------------------------- 49 00
Quarterly total--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,427.54
1962-8
Gross backpay--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,476 54
Gross interim earnings----------------------------------------------- 0 00
Less Expenses . (10 gallons of gas per week, seeking work, 10 weeks).- 31.00
Net interim earnings--- ------------------------------------------------------------- 0 00
Quarterly total------------------------------------------------------------- -------------- 1,476.54
1962-4
-Gross back-pay-------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,476.54
Gross interim earnings
Automotive Delivery Service, Inc ,
Miami Beach-------------------------------------- 424.65
Home Milk Producers, Miami----------------------- 70 00
Ready Potatoes, Inc, Miami------------------------ 110.60
Mickey Killen, Miami------------------------------- 250 00
855 25
Less Expenses (Excess mileage in retaining or seeking interim employ-
ment-10 weeks. Est . $31.00)------------------------------------- 31 00
Net interim earnings -------------------------------------------------------------- 824.25
Quarterly total--------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- 652 29
1963-i
Gross backpay--------------------------------------------------------------------- 1,524 69
Gross interim earnings (to date of quit 2-9-63 ) (Ready
Potatoes, Miami)-------------------------------------- 510 75
Continue earnings-7 full weeks at $88 05 (average $17.61
a day) ------------------------------------------------- 616 35
Net interim earnings --------------------------------------------------------------- 1,127 10
Quarterly total------------------------------ ------------------------------------------- 397.59
1963-2
Gross backpay--------------------------------------------------------------------
Continue earnings (Ready Potatoes ) 4 work days through
1,524.69
April 4------------------------------------------------ 70 44
Gross interim earnings (Seaboard Beverages , Miami).--- 1,023 17
1,093.61
Less Expenses (Excess mileage to Seaboard , 18 per week, or 234 miles
per quarter at 8¢= $18 72)----------------------------------------- 18 72
Net interim earnings----------- ---------------------------------------------------- 1,074 89
Quarterly total------------------------------------------------------------------------- 449.85
1963-3
Gross backpay---------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross interim earnings:
1,524.69
Seaboard Beverages, Miami------------------------- 1,054 84
Jimmy Dice, Miami--------------------------------- 80 00
1,134 84
Less Expenses (Excess mileage to Seaboard , 18 per week , or 180 miles
for 10 weeks at S¢= $14 40) ----------------------------------------- 14 40
Net interim earnings----------- ---------------------------------------------------- 1,120 44
404.20Quarterly total-------------------------------------------------------------------------
1718 DECISIONS OF NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
APPENDIX B-Continued
1963-4
Gross backpay ---------------------------------------------------------------------
Gross interim earnings (Jimmy Dico, Miami) ----------------------- 440 00
Less Expenses ------------------------------------------------------ 0 00
Net interim earnings ----------------------------- -------------------------------
1,524.69
440 00
Quarterly total -- ---- --------------- ---- --------------- --------------------------------- 1,084 69,
1964-1
Gross backpay (to February 10, 1964-reinstated) ------------------------------ 703 68
Gross interim earnings (Jimmy Dico, Miami) ---------------------------------- 20 00
Quarterly total ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 683 68
Total net backpay due (excluding interest) --------------------------------------------- 9,271 28-
0