NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER,
v.
ROCK HILL CONVALESCENT CENTER, 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 employer violated the National Labor Relations Act by denying reinstatement and discharging employees, and that the notice provision of § 8(g) does not apply to unrepresented employees.
The National Labor Relations Board sought enforcement of its order against Rock Hill Convalescent Center for violating the Act. The Board found the Ce…
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 Labor Organization Definition cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This appeal involves application of the National Labor Relations Board for enforcement of its order issued November 10, 1976, against the respondent Rock Hill Convalescent Center,1 pursuant to § 10(e) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended (61 Stat. 136, 73 Stat. 519, 88 Stat. 395, 29 U.S.C. § 151, et seq.). The Board found that the respondent had violated § 8(a)(1) of the Act by denying reinstatement to two employees, and by discharging one employee in violation of § 8(a)(4) and (1) of the Act, and required the respondent to cease and desist from the unfair labor practices found and to offer these employees reinstatement to their former jobs with backpay.
So far as the belated contention of the respondent that the ten-day notice provision of § 8(g) was not complied with by the employees, the notice requirement only applies to “labor organizations.” The employees involved in this case were unrepresented employees and therefore were not required to give notice to the respondent under the Act. See, Kapiolani Hospital v. NLRB (9th Cir. 1978) 581 F. 2d 230.
From our review of the record as a whole, there is substantial evidence to support the findings of the Board. Accordingly the petition for enforcement of the Board’s Decision and Order is granted.
ENFORCEMENT GRANTED.
. 226 NLRB No. 133.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Montefiore Hosp. & Med. Ctr. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 621 F.2d 510 (2d Cir. 1980)
-
E. Chicago Rehab. Ctr., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 710 F.2d 397 (7th Cir. 1983)
Authorities Cited
- Kapiolani Hosp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 581 F.2d 230 (9th Cir. 1978)