BREAKER CONFECTIONS, INC., PETITIONER,
v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATONS BOARD, RESPONDENT

4th Cir. | 1968-10-29
No. 12078
402 F.2d 499 United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit (1968) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that an employer's good faith doubt of a union's majority, based on a card count, can prevent enforcement of a bargaining order, even if the union lost an election.


Facts & Procedural History

The Labor Board found an employer violated NLRA § 8(a)(5) by refusing recognition to a union based on signed authorization cards, despite the union lo…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

The Labor Board found the employer had violated § 8(a) (5) of the National Labor Relations Act in refusing recognition to a union which claimed a majority of the employees in the unit on the basis of signed authorization cards, notwithstanding the fact that the union lost the Board’s supervised consent election. On the basis of conflicting testimony, the Board found some relatively minimal violations by the employer of § 8(a) (1) of the Act preceding the election, but they were not so pervasive as to be beyond the effective corrective process of a cease and desist order so as to assure a completely reliable reflection of the employees’ wishes in a second election.

In a number of recent cases, altogether comparable, we have declined enforcement of bargaining orders where there was nothing in the circumstances to overcome an employer’s assertion of good faith doubt of the union’s majority claim, when the union’s claim was based entirely upon a card count.*

We decline enforcement of the bargaining order. Since in the disputed evidence, there is support for the Board’s findings of violations of § 8(a) (1), its order, insofar as it proscribes such violations, will be enforced.

Enforced in part; enforcement denied in part.

*

General Steel Prods., Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 4 Cir., 398 F. 2d 339; N.L.R.B. v. Heck’s Inc., 4 Cir., 398 F. 2d 337; N.L.R.B. v. Gissel Packing Co., 4 Cir., 398 F. 2d 336; N.L.R.B. v. S.S. Logan Packing Co., 4 Cir., 386 F. 2d 562; Crawford Mfg. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 4 Cir., 386 F. 2d 367; N.L.R.B. v. Heck’s Inc., 4 Cir., 386 F. 2d 317. See also N.L.R.B. v. Sehon Stevenson & Co., 4 Cir., 386 F. 2d 551.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw