MID AMERICA MEDIA, INC., WTRX-AM, PETITIONER,
v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, RESPONDENT

6th Cir. | 1981-10-20
No. 80-1357
Before LIVELY and ENGEL, Circuit Judges; and WHITE, District Judge.
663 F.2d 17 United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (1981) 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 the election objections did not raise substantial and material factual issues, thus a hearing was not required and the NLRB's order should be enforced.


Facts & Procedural History

Mid America Media, Inc. (petitioner) was found by the NLRB to have unlawfully refused to bargain with its employees' certified representative. The pet…

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

Mid America Media, Inc., WTRX-AM, petitions this court to review and set aside a decision and order of the National Labor Relations Board reported at 248 NLRB No. 165. The Board found that the petitioner violated Section 8(a)(5) of the Act by unlawfully refusing to bargain with the certified representative of its employees. The Board has filed a cross-application for enforcement of its order. At oral argument counsel for the petitioner stated that the real issue in the case is whether the NLRB will be required to follow its own rule that a regional director must hold a hearing on election objections when these objections disclose substantial issues of material fact concerning the validity of a representation election. The rule of the NLRB reflects the standard of this Circuit that a hearing is required only when substantial and material factual issues are raised. NLRB v. Tennessee Packers, Inc., 379 F. 2d 172 (6th Cir.), cert, denied, 389 U.S. 958, 88 S.Ct. 338, 19 L.Ed.2d 364 (1967).

Upon consideration of the briefs and oral arguments of counsel together with the record on appeal, the court concludes that the objections in the present case did not raise substantial and material factual issues about the validity of the representation election and that a hearing was not required. This being so, the order of the Board should be enforced. The petition to review is denied, and the cross-application for enforcement is granted.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw