NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER,
v.
V & H INDUSTRIES, INC., RESPONDENT
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.
The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's orders requiring V & H Industries to cease unfair labor practices and bargain with the union are supported by substantial evidence and will be enforced.
The National Labor Relations Board petitioned for enforcement of its orders against V & H Industries, Inc. The Board found the company engaged in unfa…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Unfair Labor Practice cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
The National Labor Relations Board petitions for enforcement of its orders requiring respondent V & H Industries, Inc. to cease and desist from certain unfair labor practices, to reinstate with back pay employees William Bieniek, Norman Kwasniewski, James Borowik and Allen Schmidt who were discriminatorily laid off, to reinstate with back pay employee Rita Kwasniewski who the Board found was not returned to work because of her testimony before the Board, and to bargain with the Union (International Union of Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers) upon request.
The Board’s findings that the Employer violated Section 8(a) (1) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(a) (1), by threatening its employees with reprisals for engaging in union activities, are supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole, as are the findings that four employees were laid off in violation of Section 8(a) (3) and 8(a) (1) for union activity and another employee was refused reinstatement in violation of Section 8(a) (4) and 8(a) (1) because of her testimony at a Board hearing.
There is also substantial evidence on the record as a whole to support the Board’s finding that the Employer violated Section 8(a) (5) and 8(a) (1) by refusing to recognize and bargain with the Union.
The Employer’s unfair labor practices justify the Board in imposing a bargaining order. N.L.R.B. v. Gissel Packing Co., Inc., 395 U.S. 575, 89 S.Ct. 1918, 23 L.Ed.2d 547 (1969). Under the Gissel case the choice of an appropriate remedy is entrusted largely to the Board’s expertise. N.L.R.B. v. Gissel Packing Co., Inc., supra at n. 32. The Board made the required finding that a fair election was not possible and no reason is advanced which would authorize us to reject that finding.
Order enforced.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. George J. Roberts & Sons, Inc., 451 F.2d 941 (2d Cir. 1971)
-
The Florsheim Shoe Store Co. OF Pittsburgh v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 565 F.2d 1240 (2d Cir. 1977)
Authorities Cited
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co., Inc., 395 U.S. 575 (U.S. 1969)