Cite as 352 F.2d 303 (1965)
The Board thereafter reconsidered the matter, vacated its original order and adopted “not only the findings, but also the conclusions and recommendations of the Trial Examiner”. The proceedings are now before us on the petition of the employer to review the action of the Board in determining that the employer had discharged the employees in question because of their opposition to the union’s leadership. As we held in our prior opinjon and as we reiterate from our own current second examination of the record, the Board’s findings in that regard are supported by substantial evidence on the whole case. That part of the Board’s order concerning back pay, including the interest allowed, is well within its discretion.
The petition for review will be denied. The order of the Board will be enforced in full. A proposed decree may be submitted by the Board.
WORLD WIDE TELEVISION CORPORATION, Lu-Gil Corporation and Gilbert Tucker, Petitioners,
v.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION.
No. 15150.
United States Court of Appeals
Third Circuit.
Argued Sept. 20, 1965.
Decided Oct. 6, 1965.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 21, 1965.
Hymen Schwartz, Philadelphia, Pa. (Gerber & Galfand, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for petitioners.
Frank Gregory, Washington, D. C. (James McI. Henderson, Gen. Counsel, J. B. Truly, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Gerald Harwood, Washington, D. C., on the brief), for respondent.
Before McLAUGHLIN, HASTIE and FREEDMAN, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
In this proceeding the Federal Trade Commission charged petitioners with unfair and deceptive acts and practices and unfair methods of competition in commerce in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act by misrepresenting the selling terms, financing, service and guarantees for new and used television sets sold by them. The evidence was stipulated by the parties. That stipulation plus an addendum thereto and twenty-one Commission exhibits and the pleadings substantially constituted the record. From the record the Hearing Examiner made exhaustive Findings of Fact. From those Findings the Examiner concluded:
“The aforesaid acts and practices of respondents as herein alleged, were and are all to the prejudice and injury of the public and of respondents’ competitors and constituted,
