a carrier (subject to its continuing authority to supervise and direct the manner of rendition of his service) who performs any work,” 45 U.S.C. § 151 Fifth — and refused to infer from its reference to current activity any actual requirement of current work; rather we upheld the Board’s decision that former strikers not presently working could vote. “[Njeither section purports to speak exclusively.” Id. at 460. We also refused to draw negative implications from the contrast in wording between the RLA and the NLRA. See id. at 461. In both this case and PCCA there is statutory language that states something affirmative; in both the issue is whether that affirmative implies a negative. Structurally, the issues are just the same. See also International Bhd. of Teamsters, 402 F.2d at 201-03 (<HOLDING>). As the APA does not qualify the congressional
holding that zoning boards of appeal do not have the inherent power to grant a rehearing recognizing implied duty to produce and market recognizing implied duty to market recognizing that any witness has the right to refuse to be interviewed if he so desires and is not under or subject to legal process recognizing boards implied power to refuse to certify or to decertify representatives even though the statute authorized only identification and certification