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

• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local NO. 2 OF the United Ass'n OF Journeymen & Apprentices OF the Plumbing & Pipefitting Indus. OF the United States & Canada, AFL-CIO
  360 F.2d 428· 2d Cir.· 1966-05-12 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the union's strike to prevent the hiring of non-union workers violated the National Labor Relations Act, and modified the Board's order regarding back pay and contract interpretation.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Schnell Tool & DIE Corp. & Salem Stamping & Mfg. Co., Inc.
  359 F.2d 39· 6th Cir.· 1966-04-27 ·cited 14×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that while it found substantial evidence supporting the NLRB's findings of unfair labor practices, it would withhold full enforcement of the order because the companies had ceased operations and sold their facilities, rendering a full decree potentially moot.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ambrose Distrib. Co.
  358 F.2d 319· 9th Cir.· 1966-03-09 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices were supported by substantial evidence and granted enforcement of its order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Inglewood Park Cemetery Ass'n
  355 F.2d 448· 9th Cir.· 1966-01-14 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board had jurisdiction over the respondent cemetery association because its operations, though primarily local, affected interstate commerce, and the de minimis rule did not apply to its interstate purchases.
• Figueroa v. Nat'l Mar. Union OF Am., AFL-CIO
  342 F.2d 400· 2d Cir.· 1965-03-11 ·cited 14×
  The court held that while union interference with employment can constitute 'discipline' under LMRDA Section 101(a)(5), a union is not required to grant a hearing when a seaman admits to convictions that disqualify them from employment under a collective bargaining agreement.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l Union, United Auto., Aircraft & Agric. Implement Workers of Am., Afl-Cio
  320 F.2d 12· 1st Cir.· 1963-07-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that employees who voluntarily join a union are subject to its reasonable internal regulations, even if those regulations restrict the timing of resignations, and that the union did not violate the NLRA by seeking to enforce its membership and dues requirements und
• Brewers & Maltsters Local Union NO. 6 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  301 F.2d 216· 8th Cir.· 1962-04-10 ·cited 14×
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the National Labor Relations Board's finding that the Company discharged Gerak at the Union's request, constituting unlawful discrimination, and that the Union's actions violated the Act.
• Hwy. Truck Drivers & Helpers Local 107 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  273 F.2d 815· D.C. Cir.· 1959-12-23 ·cited 14×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the union's actions constituted unfair labor practices under the National Labor Relations Act, but modified the scope of the Board's order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Empire Mfg. Corp.
  260 F.2d 528· 4th Cir.· 1958-10-22 ·cited 14×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the National Labor Relations Board's findings that the employer violated the Labor Management Relations Act by threatening employees and discharging them due to union activity.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cal. Date Growers Ass'n
  259 F.2d 587· 9th Cir.· 1958-09-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the employer's revision of the seniority list to punish strikers was an unfair labor practice, but modified the Board's order to be less broad.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Imparato Stevedoring Corp.
  250 F.2d 297· 3d Cir.· 1957-12-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that an employer violates the National Labor Relations Act by yielding to union pressure to discriminate against employees who refuse to pay illegal assessments, and by suspending an employee under such pressure.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l Woodworkers OF Am., AFL-CIO
  243 F.2d 745· 5th Cir.· 1957-04-26 ·cited 14×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that acts of violence and threats against supervisory employees and independent contractors, committed in the presence of striking employees, constitute an unfair labor practice by coercing strikers to remain out. The Board's order for enforcement is valid.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Norma Mining Corp.
  206 F.2d 38· 4th Cir.· 1953-07-13 ·cited 14×
  The court held that Norma Mining Corporation was not a joint employer with its lessees, and therefore not responsible for their alleged unfair labor practices under the National Labor Relations Act. The court also found sufficient evidence to uphold the National Labor Relations B
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 57
  201 F.2d 771· 1st Cir.· 1953-02-03 ·cited 14×
  The court held that an employer is not an indispensable party when determining if a union violated Section 8(b)(2) of the NLRA, and that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding of discriminatory discharge.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Penokee Veneer Co.
  168 F.2d 868· 7th Cir.· 1948-06-23 ·cited 14×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer's conduct violated Section 8(a)(1) of the Act by interfering with employees' rights to collective bargaining.
• R. R. Donnelley & Sons Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  156 F.2d 416· 7th Cir.· 1946-06-12 ·cited 14×·via Section 7 Of The Act
  The court held that the employer's actions, including threats and intimidation by supervisors, constituted unlawful interference with employee rights under Section 8(1) of the NLRA, and that the demotion of a foreman was discriminatorily motivated by his union activity, violating
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Am. Pearl Button Co.
  149 F.2d 311· 8th Cir.· 1945-05-08 ·cited 14×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that statements made by the American Pearl Button Company's president and foremen constituted unfair labor practices by interfering with employees' rights, but the Washington Chamber of Commerce's actions did not. Enforcement of the Board's order was granted agains
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Faultless Caster Corp.
  135 F.2d 559· 7th Cir.· 1943-05-14 ·cited 14×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the employer engaged in unfair labor practices by interfering with, dominating, and coercing employees in their union activities, and by demoting an employee due to union membership. The court enforced the NLRB's order with modifications.
• Gamble-Robinson Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  129 F.2d 588· 8th Cir.· 1942-07-17 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices, including interference, restraint, coercion, discriminatory discharge, and discriminatory refusal to rehire, were supported by substantial evidence and did not violate the employer's free
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. WM. Tehel Bottling Co.
  129 F.2d 250· 8th Cir.· 1942-07-02 ·cited 14×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order was supported by substantial evidence and would be enforced, rejecting the respondent's defenses.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Martin Bros. Box Co.
  130 F.2d 202· 7th Cir.· 1942-06-23 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the employer engaged in unfair labor practices by interfering with employee rights, discriminatorily discharging union leaders, and refusing to bargain collectively in good faith.
• Wilson & Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  120 F.2d 913· 7th Cir.· 1941-06-24 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Labor Board was not justified in finding that the petitioner violated Section 8(1) by circulating a letter or by isolated statements of supervisors, nor did it violate Section 8(3) by its position on reinstating strikers.
• G. Heileman Brewing Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  879 F.2d 1526· 7th Cir.· 1989-07-19 ·cited 13×
  The court held that G. Heileman Brewing Company was a joint employer and violated the NLRA by refusing to bargain with the union over its decision to subcontract electrical maintenance work.
• Bechtel Constr., Inc. v. United Bhd. OF Carpenters & Joiners OF Am. & San Diego Dist. Council of Carpenters Local 1278
  812 F.2d 1220· 9th Cir.· 1987-03-17 ·cited 13×
  California law does not place its apprenticeship wage standards above the collective bargaining process, and such standards are preempted by federal labor law when they conflict with a collectively bargained lower wage rate.
• E.I. DU Pont de Nemours & Co. (Chestnut RUN) v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  733 F.2d 296· 3d Cir.· 1984-05-14 ·cited 13×·via Section 7 Concerted Activity
  The court granted the NLRB's motion to vacate its prior opinion and remand the case for further consideration, deferring to the Board's expertise.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. United Techs. Corp.
  706 F.2d 1254· 2d Cir.· 1983-04-21 ·cited 13×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The Supreme Court's decision in Magnavox establishes that employers cannot restrict employees' union solicitation rights during non-working hours, and unions cannot waive these rights, thus precluding collateral estoppel effect for prior decisions that allowed such restrictions.
• Howard Johnson Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  702 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1983-03-02 ·cited 13×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that discharging a supervisor for refusing to identify union supporters constitutes an unfair labor practice, as it interferes with employees' Section 7 rights.
• Marshall v. Stevens People AND Friends FOR Freedom and E. C. (Mildred) Ramsey
  669 F.2d 171· 4th Cir.· 1981-08-04 ·cited 13×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that while the Secretary of Labor's investigatory powers under the LMRDA are broad, the First Amendment protects the associational rights of non-supervisory employees, thus precluding disclosure of their identities. However, information regarding other contributors
• News-Texan, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  422 F.2d 381· 5th Cir.· 1970-01-09 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the company's supplementary statements undermining a settlement agreement constituted a breach, justifying the Board's revocation of the settlement, and that the discharge of an employee for union-related activities violated the National Labor Relations Act.
• Head Kandy LLC v. McNeill
  2018 WL 6335178· S.D. Fla.· 2024-10-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the defendant's motion to vacate the preliminary injunction, while ultimately unsuccessful, was not frivolous or brought in bad faith, thus denying the plaintiff's motion for Rule 11 sanctions.
• Tile v. Tile
  896 F.2d 1404· 3d Cir.· 1990-02-23 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that a local union dissolved by mass resignation cannot be subjected to a trusteeship by the parent union, and that while a mortuary fund created before dissolution was valid, the transfer of real estate was an improper disbursement subject to forfeiture.
• Shaw's Supermarkets, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  884 F.2d 34· 1st Cir.· 1989-08-31 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's finding of an unfair labor practice was inconsistent with its own precedent and lacked sufficient explanation for deviating from established rules.
• Ewing v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  861 F.2d 353· 2d Cir.· 1988-11-04 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's interpretation of 'concerted activity' under Section 7 of the NLRA, requiring a link to group action, is a reasonable construction of the Act, even if it means individual invocation of statutory employment rights may not be
• Eisenberg v. Lenape Prods., Inc.
  781 F.2d 999· 3d Cir.· 1986-01-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by finding that injunctive relief was not necessary to prevent harm to employees' right to engage in concerted activity pending final relief.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Holyoke Water Power Co.
  778 F.2d 49· 1st Cir.· 1985-11-27 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  An employer must allow a non-employee union representative access to its plant to measure noise levels in a particularly noisy room, as the union's representative is entitled to such access.
• DeQUEEN Gen. Hosp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  744 F.2d 612· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-18 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court should not enforce the Board's issuance of a bargaining order for Units A and B because the record does not support the findings of majority support or the necessity of such an order.
• Ewing v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  732 F.2d 1117· 2d Cir.· 1984-04-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's reversal of the administrative law judge's findings was not supported by substantial evidence, but remanded the case due to a subsequent change in Board precedent.
• Local ONE v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  729 F.2d 172· 2d Cir.· 1984-02-24 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's finding that employees were discharged for marijuana use, not union activity, was supported by substantial evidence.
• Am. Freight Sys., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  722 F.2d 828· D.C. Cir.· 1983-11-29 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board abused its discretion by failing to defer to a grievance committee's decision that an employee's refusal to drive a truck was unjustified under the collective bargaining agreement.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ajax Tool Works
  713 F.2d 1307· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that employee Piotrowski was a supervisor under the NLRA and that the employer unlawfully interrogated employees about their union activities, granting enforcement of the Board's order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gold Standard Enters., Inc.
  679 F.2d 673· 7th Cir.· 1982-05-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices were supported by substantial evidence and that the company could be held jointly and severally liable with the union for backpay awards.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hasbro Indus., Inc.
  672 F.2d 978· 1st Cir.· 1982-02-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Board failed to prove that wage increases were timed to influence the election, but affirmed findings that certain employer letters and employee interrogations constituted unfair labor practices.
• Pease Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  666 F.2d 1044· 6th Cir.· 1981-12-16 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices were not supported by substantial evidence, and therefore, the Board's order could not be enforced.
• RED Ball Motor Freight, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  660 F.2d 626· 5th Cir.· 1981-11-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's application of the Wright Line test to mixed-motive discharge cases was permissible and supported by substantial evidence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Circle A & W Prods. Co.
  647 F.2d 924· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-08 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court should not infer the Board's reasoning but should remand for clarification of the contract-bar rule's application.
• Lennox Indus., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  637 F.2d 340· 5th Cir.· 1981-02-17 ·cited 12×
  An employer violates the National Labor Relations Act by denying an employee's request for union representation at an investigatory interview where the employee reasonably fears discipline, even if discipline is not intended or probable.
• Krispy Kreme Doughnut Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  635 F.2d 304· 4th Cir.· 1980-12-08 ·cited 12×
  Discharge of an employee for refusing to forego a workmen's compensation claim does not constitute protected 'concerted activity' under the National Labor Relations Act unless it contemplates or involves group action.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transcon Lines
  599 F.2d 719· 5th Cir.· 1979-07-30 ·cited 12×
  The court held that while the content of the literature was protected, the National Labor Relations Board's order was overbroad in its scope regarding distribution locations and conditions.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hale Mfg. Co.
  602 F.2d 244· 2d Cir.· 1979-07-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the company was entitled to a hearing on its objections to the election due to a potentially intimidating glass-shattering incident, and that a new election was necessary.
• Delchamps, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  588 F.2d 476· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-25 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board failed to present substantial evidence that Delchamps' wage increase was an unfair labor practice intended to impede unionization.