Carpenters, painters, plumbers, and maintenance workers of the Denver Hilton Hotel were members of the International Union of Operating Engineers (IUOE). The hotel’s five electricians were represented by the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). On July 1, the IUOE began an economic strike against Hilton. Some of the other hotel employees, including IBEW member electricians Thomas Harberson and Bill Talley, honored the IUOE picket line. On July 6, Hilton began hiring replacements for its maintenance department. Two of the replacement maintenance workers, Mike Bozic and Tim Jude, performed some electrical work for the remainder of the strike. On July 12, Hilton and the IUOE reached an agreement through which all of the striking IUOE members were reinstated immediately. When Harberson and Talley returned to the hotel, they were informed that they had been permanently replaced during the strike. Hilton placed the two IBEW men on a preferential rehire list. The collective bargaining agreement between Hilton and IBEW provided that employees could not be “disciplined or discharged” for refusing to cross a legitimate picket line. Accordingly, Hilton had the right to replace, but not to discharge, the two men as long as they were replaced before the end of the strike. The IBEW filed a grievance on behalf of Harberson and Talley, claiming that the hotel did not have the right to permanently replace these two sympathy strikers because it amounted to “discipline or discharge,” forbidden under the contract. Before the arbitration board, Hilton contended that the men were not discharged or disciplined and asserted its right to replace striking employees. Hilton managers explained that Bozic and Jude had replaced the men and performed electrical work during the strike. The arbitrator ruled that the facts demonstrated that the two men had not been discharged but were merely replaced. The arbitrator further ruled that Hilton had not violated by placing the two men on a recall list because the employer had the right to replace, but not to discharge, the strikers. The IBEW also filed an unfair labor practice charge against Hilton, alleging that Hilton had violated Section 8(a)(3) by refusing to reinstate Harberson and Talley. An ALJ heard evidence that Bozic and Jude were hired not as electricians but as maintenance workers. Furthermore, the ALJ heard evidence that Bozic and Jude were given no expectation that their jobs were to be permanent when they were hired, although Hilton records had since been altered. None of this evidence had been presented to the arbitrator. Accordingly, the ALJ refused to defer to the arbitrator’s decision and ruled that when Harberson and Talley returned to work, they had not yet been replaced. Accordingly, Hilton violated by refusing to reinstate the two employees. Hilton asked the Board to overrule the ALJ and defer to the arbitrator’s award. The employer asserted that the unfair labor practice issues and contractual issues were factually parallel and were fully aired before the arbitrator. Must Hilton demonstrate the regularity of the arbitration process to prevail? Should the Board defer in this case? Decide.