Section 7 Of The Nlra

664 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 436 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Joy Silk Mills, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  185 F.2d 732· D.C. Cir.· 1950-11-02 ·cited 295×·via Section 7 Rights
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Interboro Contractors, Inc.
  388 F.2d 495· 2d Cir.· 1967-12-22 ·cited 137×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings were supported by substantial evidence, and therefore, the Board's order against the respondent for discharging employees for protected concerted activity is enforceable.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Tex-O-Kan Flour Mills Co.
  122 F.2d 433· 5th Cir.· 1941-08-05 ·cited 114×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order was not fully supported by substantial evidence regarding discriminatory discharges and layoffs, particularly where credible, non-union-related reasons were provided by management. However, the Board's finding of gene
• Local Union NO. 12 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  368 F.2d 12· 5th Cir.· 1966-11-09 ·cited 105×·via Section 7 Rights
  A union's breach of its duty of fair representation constitutes an unfair labor practice under Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the National Labor Relations Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Flomatic Corp.
  347 F.2d 74· 2d Cir.· 1965-06-14 ·cited 104×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court refused to enforce the Board's order to bargain, giving weight to the technicality that the union petitioned for an election without waiting for a reply to its bargaining request.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. S. S. Logan Packing Co.
  386 F.2d 562· 4th Cir.· 1967-10-27 ·cited 102×
  The court held that an employer's unfair labor practices do not automatically preclude a good faith doubt of union majority status, and a bargaining order is not warranted without extraordinary circumstances justifying bypassing a representation election.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Phœnix Mut. Life Ins. Co.
  167 F.2d 983· 7th Cir.· 1948-05-07 ·cited 99×
  The court held that the respondent's salesmen were employees under the NLRA, and their discharge for attempting to influence the selection of a cashier constituted an unfair labor practice.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Laney & Duke Storage Warehouse Co., Inc.
  369 F.2d 859· 5th Cir.· 1966-12-06 ·cited 98×
  The court held that the company violated the National Labor Relations Act by unlawfully interrogating employees, threatening economic reprisals, unilaterally changing terms of employment, and discharging employees for union activities, but that the second suspension of an employe
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bradley Washfountain Co.
  192 F.2d 144· 7th Cir.· 1951-11-01 ·cited 97×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the Board erred in finding unfair labor practices based on wage increases and a holiday pay concession made after notice to the union, and that the employer's "back to work" movement during an economic strike did not violate the Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ford
  170 F.2d 735· 6th Cir.· 1948-11-15 ·cited 94×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence and that the employer's actions constituted unfair labor practices.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nevis Indus., Inc.
  647 F.2d 905· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-08 ·cited 92×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the Board's findings of unlawful interference with retained employees and unlawful refusal to retain engineers due to anti-union animus, but the Board applied the wrong legal standard in ordering the reinstatement of a supervisor
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.
  157 F.2d 486· 8th Cir.· 1946-10-23 ·cited 92×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices were not supported by substantial evidence, particularly concerning employee discharges and the manager's speech.
• Boire v. Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters
  479 F.2d 778· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-08 ·cited 91×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  A temporary injunction under § 10(j) of the NLRA is appropriate when there is reasonable cause to believe unfair labor practices have occurred and equitable relief is necessary to preserve the Board's jurisdiction and the status quo, even if the legal theories are novel.
• JAS. H. Matthews & Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  354 F.2d 432· 8th Cir.· 1965-12-29 ·cited 90×
  The court held that the company violated the National Labor Relations Act by threatening employees, interrogating them, surveilling their union activities, maintaining an unlawful no-solicitation rule, and refusing to bargain with the union after it had established majority statu
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. L. B. Foster Co.
  418 F.2d 1· 9th Cir.· 1969-10-31 ·cited 88×
  The court enforced the National Labor Relations Board's order directing the employer to cease and desist from unfair labor practices and to bargain with the union, despite significant employee turnover and passage of time.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Marcus Trucking Co., Inc.
  286 F.2d 583· 2d Cir.· 1961-01-26 ·cited 84×
  The court held that recognizing a rival union during the contract-bar period constitutes an unfair labor practice, but modified the Board's remedies.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Rapid Bindery, Inc.
  293 F.2d 170· 2d Cir.· 1961-07-11 ·cited 82×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that while the move of operations was economically motivated and not a violation of § 8(a)(3), the failure to notify the union of the move and discuss its impact on employees constituted a violation of § 8(a)(5), and certain employer statements violated § 8(a)(1).
• Wellington Mill Division v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  330 F.2d 579· 4th Cir.· 1964-03-25 ·cited 80×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the company was responsible for the actions of its personnel director in suggesting and assisting the formation of an anti-union movement.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Globe Wireless
  193 F.2d 748· 9th Cir.· 1951-12-27 ·cited 77×
  The court held that discharging economic strikers before their positions are filled constitutes an unfair labor practice under the National Labor Relations Act, and that the Board can enlarge its complaint beyond the initial charge.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. The Little Rock Downtowner, Inc.
  414 F.2d 1084· 8th Cir.· 1969-08-19 ·cited 74×
  The court held that the General Counsel failed to meet the burden of proving the union represented a majority of employees on January 12, 1967, thus no wrongful refusal to bargain occurred.
• Mushroom Transp. Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  330 F.2d 683· 3d Cir.· 1964-04-24 ·cited 72×
  The court held that an employee's conversations with fellow workers, even if related to employment interests, do not constitute protected concerted activity under Section 7 of the Act unless they are engaged in with the object of initiating or inducing group action.
• United States v. Boffa
  688 F.2d 919· 3d Cir.· 1982-08-25 ·cited 71×
  A scheme to deprive employees of rights guaranteed by section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) cannot serve as the basis for a mail fraud prosecution, as the NLRA is remedial and vests exclusive authority in the NLRB to determine unfair labor practices.
• Hedstrom Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  558 F.2d 1137· 3d Cir.· 1977-07-05 ·cited 70×
  The court held that the company's Section 8(a)(1) violations were not pervasive enough to justify a bargaining order, and that the company did not violate Section 8(a)(5) by refusing to bargain with a union that did not represent a majority at the time of the demand.
• Union Starch & Ref. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  186 F.2d 1008· 7th Cir.· 1951-02-02 ·cited 70×
  An employer cannot discharge an employee under a union security agreement for reasons other than failure to tender periodic dues and initiation fees, even if other union membership conditions are not met.
• Int'l Union of Elec., Radio & Mach. Workers, Afl-Cio v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  289 F.2d 757· D.C. Cir.· 1960-06-30 ·cited 69×
  The court held that the Board cannot entertain an amendment to a complaint that the General Counsel opposes, but remanded the issue of a supervisor's statement for further proceedings.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Kaiser Agric. Chems.
  473 F.2d 374· 5th Cir.· 1973-02-02 ·cited 68×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order to cease and desist from unfair labor practices and to bargain collectively with the union was supported by substantial evidence and should be enforced.
• Hugh H. Wilson Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  414 F.2d 1345· 3d Cir.· 1969-07-03 ·cited 68×
  The discharged employees' expressions of dissatisfaction were not protected 'concerted activity' under the NLRA because they lacked the object of initiating or promoting group action, and the employer lacked knowledge of any concerted nature.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Elias Bros. BIG BOY, Inc.
  327 F.2d 421· 6th Cir.· 1964-02-12 ·cited 68×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer did not discriminatorily discharge Ann Maniscalco, finding she was not a bona fide employee under the Act and had given notice of her intent to leave.
• The Colson Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  347 F.2d 128· 8th Cir.· 1965-06-14 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the employer violated the National Labor Relations Act by refusing to bargain with the union and by engaging in coercive activities, and that the union did not waive its right to file an unfair labor practice charge by proceeding to an election.
• Am. Newspaper Publishers Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  193 F.2d 782· 7th Cir.· 1951-12-27 ·cited 66×·via Section 7 Of The Act
  The court held that the International Typographical Union's (ITU) "no contract" policy and its associated actions constituted unfair labor practices under the Labor Management Relations Act of 1947.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Tenn. Coach Co.
  191 F.2d 546· 6th Cir.· 1951-07-09 ·cited 66×
  The court held that the company did not commit an unfair labor practice by discharging Homer F. Fritts, as the discharge was justified by his conduct of threatening employees regarding union membership during working hours, and that certain statements by supervisory employees did
• Kan. Milling Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  185 F.2d 413· 10th Cir.· 1950-11-09 ·cited 66×
  The court held that an amended charge, if it introduces new and unrelated claims, does not relate back to the date of the original charge for statute of limitations purposes.
• Sheraton-Kauai Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  429 F.2d 1352· 9th Cir.· 1970-07-23 ·cited 65×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's policy of allowing employees at a new single location to choose their bargaining representative, rather than automatically accreting them into an existing multi-location unit, is a lawful exercise of the Board's discretion.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Pincus Bros.
  620 F.2d 367· 3d Cir.· 1980-04-17 ·cited 64×
  The dissenting judge argues that the Spielberg-Collyer doctrine, allowing the NLRB to defer unfair labor practice charges to arbitration, lacks statutory basis and undermines the Board's public policy function. The judge believes deferral is inappropriate for charges involving in
• Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  407 F.2d 1357· 4th Cir.· 1969-03-17 ·cited 64×·via Section 7 Of The Act
  The court held that the company violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by granting employee benefits (shift differentials and improved maternity leave) to influence an upcoming election, and by discharging employees for engaging in protected concerted activity related to workplace c
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cambria Clay Prods. Co.
  215 F.2d 48· 6th Cir.· 1954-07-07 ·cited 64×
  The court held that while some employee discharges and strike-related issues were supported by evidence of unfair labor practices, the company did not refuse to bargain in good faith, and further evidence was needed regarding contempt findings for certain employees.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nabors
  196 F.2d 272· 5th Cir.· 1952-04-29 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices and discriminatory discharges were supported by substantial evidence and would be enforced.
• Great S. Trucking Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  127 F.2d 180· 4th Cir.· 1942-04-13 ·cited 64×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices, including refusal to bargain in good faith and discriminatory discharge of strikers, were supported by substantial evidence and that the Board's order was valid.
• Fla. Steel Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  529 F.2d 1225· 5th Cir.· 1976-04-12 ·cited 62×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that while most of the Board's findings of unfair labor practices were supported by substantial evidence, the discharge of employee Blessing was for good cause and not a violation of the Act. Enforcement of the Board's order was granted in part and denied in part.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Walton Mfg. Co.
  289 F.2d 177· 5th Cir.· 1961-03-17 ·cited 62×
  The court held that an employer's rule prohibiting solicitations on company property, even if framed as prohibiting 'outside business,' could be reasonably interpreted by employees to ban union solicitation, making it unlawful on its face. The court also held that announcing a ma
• Prill v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  755 F.2d 941· D.C. Cir.· 1985-02-26 ·cited 61×
  The Board's interpretation of 'concerted activity' under Section 7 of the NLRA, as articulated in Meyers Industries, is reasonable and entitled to deference, and the majority erred in remanding the case.
• Local NO. 3-193 Int'l Woodworkers OF Am. v. Ketchikan Pulp Co.
  611 F.2d 1295· 9th Cir.· 1980-01-21 ·cited 60×
  The court held that while it has jurisdiction to interpret the collective bargaining agreement, Section 301 does not grant federal courts initial authority to determine representation issues or appropriate bargaining units, which fall under the NLRB's primary jurisdiction. A cont
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Eagle Material Handling, Inc.
  558 F.2d 160· 3d Cir.· 1977-06-22 ·cited 60×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the Board's findings of unfair labor practices and that the remedies imposed were within the Board's discretion, granting enforcement of the Board's orders.
• Smith v. Local NO. 25
  500 F.2d 741· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-11 ·cited 60×
  The court held that federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction over duty of fair representation claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1337, but affirmed summary judgment for the union due to lack of evidence of discrimination.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Buddies Supermarkets, Inc.
  481 F.2d 714· 5th Cir.· 1973-06-25 ·cited 60×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that an employee's individual efforts to secure more favorable contract terms for himself, without evidence of intent to initiate or induce group action, do not constitute protected concerted activity under the NLRA. It also held that there was insufficient evidenc
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Safway Steel Scaffolds Co. OF Ga.
  383 F.2d 273· 5th Cir.· 1967-09-07 ·cited 60×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the Board's order should be enforced, except for an overly broad injunction against any future Section 7 violation, as the company committed unfair labor practices by refusing to bargain in good faith and discriminating against employees.
• Edward Fields, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  325 F.2d 754· 2d Cir.· 1963-12-20 ·cited 60×
  The court held that while the employer committed unfair labor practices by interrogating employees and assisting in an anti-union petition, it did not violate the duty to bargain because it had a good-faith doubt as to the union's majority status.
• Snow v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  308 F.2d 687· 9th Cir.· 1962-09-28 ·cited 60×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer's refusal to bargain was an unfair labor practice because they did not have a good faith doubt of the union's majority status, and that the company unlawfully refused to reinstate nine striking employees.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Buitoni Foods Corp.
  298 F.2d 169· 3d Cir.· 1962-01-15 ·cited 60×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices were supported by substantial evidence, and its order for enforcement was valid.
• Peoples GAS Sys., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  629 F.2d 35· D.C. Cir.· 1980-05-02 ·cited 58×·via Section 7 Rights