74-699 O-72 - 54

Mr. DONALD ELISBURG, Counsel,

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,

OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL,
Washington, D.C., September 24, 1971.

Senate Labor Subcommittee, New Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. ELISBURG: In accordance with our telephone conversation this A.M., I am enclosing time elapsed data that you requested.

Please note that Table 2 sets out the latest data that we have readily available in the area of court processing time.

We are presently incorporating court time-e'apsed data into our automatic data processing system for reporting on a monthly basis. Thus, in the near future, we will be able to supply this material on a current basis.

If I may be of further assistance, please feel free to contact me (Code 128, ext. 5072).

Sincerely,

MILFORD C. CLEVELAND,
Statistical Assistant.

TABLE 1.-UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE CASES PROCESSED BEFORE THE NLRB MEDIAN DAYS ELAPSED BY MAJOR STAGES (FISCAL YEARS 1970 TO 1971 AND JULY 1971)

Source: National Labor Relations Board, Division of Administration, Office of Statistical Reports and Evaluation.
TABLE 2.-UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICE CASES PROCESSED BEFORE THE U.S. CIRCUIT COURTS OF APPEALS, MEDIAN
DAYS ELAPSED FROM BOARD DECISION TO COURT OPINION (1ST HALF OF FISCAL YEARS 1969 AND 1970)

1 Board petitions U.S. Court of Appeals for a court decision enforcing the order of the board.

2 Parts aggrieved by a final order of the board petitions a U.S. Court of Appeals to review such order. Source: National Labor Relations Board, Division of Administration, Office of Statistical Reports and Evaluation. TABLE 3.-REPRESENTATION PETITIONS MEDIAN DAYS ELAPSED BY MAJOR STAGES (FISCAL YEARS 1970 TO 1971

Source: National Labor Relations Board, Division of Administration, Office of Statistical Reports and Evaluation

Mr. WILLIAMS It has been mentioned, I think, by two of the Senators who spoke in opposition to the amendment offered by the Senator from Colorado, that there is great concern in the Federal judiciary, expressed from the pinnacle by the Chief Justice of the United States,

Justice Burger, speaking as the Senator from New York pointed out. I think it should be emphasized again that the crushing problems of the new caseload that is coming to the Federal district courts was emphasized by the Chief Justice in a speech before the American Bar Association, I believe in July of 1970, and that the situation has not improved, as the matter inserted in the Record will show.

From time to time Congress adds more judges, but the total judicial organization never quite keeps up with the caseload. Two recent statutes alone added thousands of cases relating to commitment of narcotic addicts and the menta ly ill. These additions came when civil rights cases, the voting cases, and prisoner petitions were expanding by the thousands.

That situation, if the amendment of the Senator from Colorado were adopted and became law, would be further aggravated. That should not be the only reason for a definitive decision on this question; I recognize that. If due process and fairness of judicial equity demanded, of course, we would have to pay that price, and the President would realize it and would have to appoint more judges to take care of the caseload.

But our entire history, particularly, I would say, of the last 30 years the Senator from New York will correct me if I misstatethree decades of experience with this matter of enforcement by an administrative agency, with the Administrative Procedure Act as part of the whole process, have shown that it preserves all of the demands and mandates in this country of fairness in reaching a decision.

Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. WILLIAMS. I yield.

Mr. ERVIN. The Senator is aware that the Supreme Court of the United States has held that Congress is without constitutional power to give final jurisdiction to an administrative or quasi-judicial body and deny the right of review in Federal courts, is he not?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, of course, and that is provided clearly in the legislation before the Senate.

Mr. ERVIN. So this measure recognizes that there can be a review in the Federal courts even under the bill as introduced by the distinguished Senator from New Jersey.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Well, certainly. It is abundantly clear that all the procedures demanded by the Constitution are a part of this legislation. Mr. ERVIN. This bill would extend the jurisdiction of the Commission to the hiring practices of every businessman who employs as many as eight employees, would it not?

Mr. WILLIAMS. That is correct.

Mr. ERVIN. And that would bring millions of additional people under the coverage of the bill, would it not?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes.

Mr. ERVIN. Not only that, but this bill would extend the coverage of the act to all employees of all the States and local subdivisions of States, would it not?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Yes. And I wonder, if we are going to have an advocacy in support of the amendment here, whether the Senator would request some time.

Mr. ERVIN. I have no time. If the Senator will yield me some time, I would be glad to have it.