NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER,
v.
FEDERATED PUBLICATIONS, INC. D/B/A THE STATE JOURNAL, 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 order finding contract haulers to be employees and that the company violated the Act by discharging them is supported by substantial evidence.
The National Labor Relations Board sought enforcement of its order against a newspaper company. The Board found the company's 'contract haulers' were …
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 Employee Vs. Independent Contractor Determination cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This case is before the court on the application of the National Labor Relations Board for enforcement of its order issued against respondent on June 2,1975. Reference is made to the decision and order of the Board at 218 N.L.R.B. No. 20 for a recitation of pertinent facts.
The Board held that the newspaper’s “contract haulers” were employees rather than independent contractors. We conclude that this holding of the Board is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. Universal Camera Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 340 U.S. 474, 71 S.Ct. 456, 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951); Aetna Freight Lines v. N. L. R. B., 520 F. 2d 928, 930 (6th Cir. 1975); N. L. R. B. v. Pepsi Cola Bottling Co., 455 F. 2d 1134 (6th Cir. 1972); The News Journal Company v. N. L. R. B., 447 F. 2d 65 (3rd Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1016, 92 S.Ct. 676, 30 L.Ed.2d 664 (1972); Maxwell Company v. N. L. R. B., 414 F. 2d 477, 481 (6th Cir. 1969).
There is also substantial evidence on the record as a whole to support the conclusion of the Board that the Company violated §§ 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act by discharging all its “contract haulers” and that a bargaining order is an appropriate remedy. N. L. R. B. v. Gissell Packing Co., Inc., 395 U.S. 575, 89 S.Ct. 1918, 23 L.Ed.2d 547 (1969).
The Company contends that the Board’s unit determination is without an articulated rationale, and constitutes an abuse of discretion. We conclude that this contention is not supported by the record.
Enforcement granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 340 U.S. 474 (U.S. 1951)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co., Inc., 395 U.S. 575 (U.S. 1969)
- Simms v. Superior Court of Cal., 404 U.S. 1016 (U.S. 1972)
- News-Journal Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 404 U.S. 1016 (U.S. 1972)
- The News-Journal Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 447 F.2d 65 (3d Cir. 1971)
- The Maxwell Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 414 F.2d 477 (6th Cir. 1969)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Pepsi Cola Bottling Co. OF Mansfield, 455 F.2d 1134 (6th Cir. 1972)
- The AETNA Freight Lines, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 520 F.2d 928 (6th Cir. 1975)