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

• Timpte v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  590 F.2d 871· 10th Cir.· 1979-01-19 ·cited 12×
  An employer may prohibit the distribution of defamatory and vulgar literature in the workplace and discharge an employee for insubordination when they refuse to agree to such restrictions.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. William S. Carroll, Inc.
  578 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1978-06-23 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Concerted Activity
  The court held that the employer did not violate the National Labor Relations Act by discharging an employee for refusing to cross a picket line at a customer's premises, as the employer demonstrated a legitimate business reason for the dismissal and the Board failed to prove ant
• Marshall v. Daniel Constr. Co., Inc.
  563 F.2d 707· 5th Cir.· 1977-11-21 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The dissenting judge argues that the Secretary of Labor's regulation, allowing employees to refuse work in imminent danger without penalty, is reasonably related to the Occupational Safety and Health Act's purposes and should not be invalidated based on legislative history.
• MT. Vernon Tanker Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  549 F.2d 571· 9th Cir.· 1977-03-04 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  Requiring a seaman to attend a logging proceeding without a union representative does not violate Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act in the maritime context.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Prescott Indus. Prods. Co.
  500 F.2d 6· 8th Cir.· 1974-07-16 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that an employee's insubordinate conduct during a company speech, even if related to union activity, can be grounds for discharge if it is flagrant and disrupts management's right to maintain order. However, an employer interrogating employees about union activitie
• Mobil OIL Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  482 F.2d 842· 7th Cir.· 1973-07-17 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that employees do not have a statutory right to union representation at management-conducted, investigatory interviews concerning suspected theft, absent a contractual provision or employer anti-union motivation.
• W. Addition Cmty. Org. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  485 F.2d 917· D.C. Cir.· 1973-06-29 ·cited 12×
  The National Labor Relations Act does not preclude minority employees from bargaining directly with their employer regarding racial discrimination issues, even if it conflicts with the union's exclusive bargaining status.
• Morton Salt Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  472 F.2d 416· 9th Cir.· 1972-12-08 ·cited 12×
  The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) correctly determined it lacked jurisdiction to review the reasonableness of union fines imposed on members for crossing a picket line, as such fines do not constitute unfair labor practices under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 294
  470 F.2d 57· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-05 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order finding the Union violated Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act by fining and suspending a member for filing unfair labor practice charges is supported by substantial evidence and will be enforced.
• Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers, Dist. NO. 8, AFL-CIO v. J. L. Clark Co.
  471 F.2d 694· 7th Cir.· 1972-11-20 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The dissenting judge would hold that Cinelli was not entitled to reassume his employment until a vacancy occurred, as Hinsch, who took permanent employee status during the strike, should be protected.
• Algie v. Surratt
  463 F.2d 378· 5th Cir.· 1972-06-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court properly denied the NLRB's motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, as the NLRB's mechanistic application of its blocking charge principle denied plaintiffs due process.
• Montana-Dakota Utils. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  455 F.2d 1088· 8th Cir.· 1972-03-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the collective bargaining agreement, particularly the no-strike clause and arbitration provisions, waived the employees' right to refuse to cross a peaceful informational picket line, and therefore the company's suspension of employees for such refusal was not
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l van Lines
  448 F.2d 905· 9th Cir.· 1971-09-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the company's discharge of four employees for refusing to cross a picket line was an unfair labor practice, but remanded the case for further findings regarding the employees' entitlement to reinstatement as economic strikers.
• Inland Trucking Co. & Wesley Meilahn v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  440 F.2d 562· 7th Cir.· 1971-03-29 ·cited 12×·via 29 U.S.C. § 157
  An employer's lockout accompanied by continued operation with temporary replacements is an unfair labor practice, as it inherently interferes with protected employee rights.
• Food Store Emps. Union, Local NO. 347, Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen OF N. Am., AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  433 F.2d 541· D.C. Cir.· 1970-05-04 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court granted enforcement of the NLRB's order to bargain and remanded for reconsideration of further relief, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's findings of unfair labor practices and bad faith.
• Local Freight Drivers v. Braswell Motor Freight Lines, Inc.
  422 F.2d 109· 9th Cir.· 1970-02-10 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the grievance committees established under the 1964 agreement had jurisdiction to hear grievances arising under the 1961 agreement, that the committee's decision was final and binding, and that the grievances were arbitrable.
• Local Union NO. 167 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  422 F.2d 538· 7th Cir.· 1970-02-06 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a union violates Section 8(b)(1)(A) of the NLRA by denying employees eligibility for pension and welfare benefits to compel them to maintain membership, even if the denial stems from the union's rules regarding membership retention.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sequoyah Mills, Inc.
  409 F.2d 606· 10th Cir.· 1969-04-15 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Board's order to reinstate employees Pyle, Steen, and Kane with back pay should be enforced, but the order as to employee Taylor should not be enforced.
• LTV Electrosystems, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  408 F.2d 1122· 4th Cir.· 1969-03-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the employees were unlawfully discharged, not that they voluntarily quit, and are entitled to reinstatement with backpay.
• Mason & Hanger-Silas Mason Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  405 F.2d 1· 5th Cir.· 1968-12-11 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the company did not violate the National Labor Relations Act by reprimanding employees for soliciting during working hours, as this was permissible under a contractual prohibition against solicitation. However, the court enforced the Board's order regarding th
• Aeronca Mfg. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  385 F.2d 724· 9th Cir.· 1967-11-01 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings that the company discharged an employee due to union activities, rather than for the stated reasons, were supported by substantial evidence.
• Indus. Union OF Marine & Shipbuilding Workers OF Am., AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  379 F.2d 702· 3d Cir.· 1967-06-22 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  A union rule requiring members to exhaust reasonable internal remedies before filing charges with the NLRB is permissible under the National Labor Relations Act and the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, and does not constitute an unfair labor practice.
• Firestone Synthetic Fibers Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  374 F.2d 211· 4th Cir.· 1967-02-10 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the record supported a finding that Firestone interfered with employee rights by threatening discharge, despite the employee not being discharged.
• Morrison-Knudsen Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  358 F.2d 411· 9th Cir.· 1966-03-24 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that discharging employees for protesting unsafe working conditions, even if not directly related to collective bargaining, constitutes protected concerted activity under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act.
• Smith v. Am. Guild OF Variety Artists
  349 F.2d 975· 8th Cir.· 1965-08-09 ·cited 12×·via 29 U.S.C. § 157
  The court held that the trial court erred in granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict on the secondary boycott and tortious interference claims, finding that factual issues existed for the jury. The court also affirmed the denial of a new trial.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. S. Transp., Inc.
  343 F.2d 558· 8th Cir.· 1965-04-14 ·cited 12×
  The court granted the National Labor Relations Board's petition for enforcement of its order, finding substantial evidence supported the Board's conclusion that the respondent failed to bargain in good faith.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Whiting Milk Corp.
  342 F.2d 8· 1st Cir.· 1965-02-26 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that granting seniority status to newly hired unionized employees at the direct expense of simultaneously employed non-unionized employees within the same unit constitutes unlawful discrimination.
• N.Y. Mailers' Union No. Six, Int'l Typographical Union, Afl-Cio v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  327 F.2d 292· 2d Cir.· 1964-01-28 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board did not err in dismissing an unfair labor practice complaint against publishers who implemented a group lockout in response to union work stoppages, finding their actions to be legitimate defensive conduct.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. I. Posner, Inc.
  304 F.2d 773· 2d Cir.· 1962-07-03 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Concerted Activity
  The court held that the Board's denial of the respondent's opportunity to present a defense regarding employee misconduct, after the Trial Examiner misled the respondent, was incompatible with procedural fairness.
• Butcher BOY Refrigerator Door Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  290 F.2d 22· 7th Cir.· 1961-04-27 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that substantial evidence on the record supported the Board's findings that the company committed unfair labor practices under the National Labor Relations Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 1566
  278 F.2d 883· 3d Cir.· 1960-05-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Union's actions and collective bargaining agreements supported the Board's findings of unlawful discriminatory hiring practices and unlawful union security clauses, but modified the remedy regarding reimbursement of fees and dues.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Roberts Bros.
  225 F.2d 58· 9th Cir.· 1955-06-30 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that conducting a secret poll of employees' union sentiments, even after a privileged speech, does not violate Section 8(a)(1) of the Labor Management Relations Act in the absence of specific coercive circumstances.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Osbrink
  218 F.2d 341· 9th Cir.· 1954-12-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order to enforce its findings regarding unfair labor practices and election invalidity was proper, applying the 'relating back' doctrine to timely charges.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. S. S. Coachman & Sons, Inc.
  203 F.2d 109· 5th Cir.· 1953-04-02 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the National Labor Relations Board's finding that the employee was discriminatorily discharged due to union activities.
• MacKAY v. Loew's, Inc.
  182 F.2d 170· 9th Cir.· 1950-05-01 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  Under California law, an employer is not liable to individual employees for discharging them in violation of a closed shop agreement, as the contract's benefit accrues to the union, not the individual members.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Kingston
  172 F.2d 771· 6th Cir.· 1949-02-21 ·cited 12×·via Section 7 Of The Act
  An employer's poll of employees regarding union preference, conducted in good faith and without threat of reprisal, does not constitute an unfair labor practice under Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act, even if the employer previously doubted the union's majority
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Winona Textile Mills, Inc.
  160 F.2d 201· 8th Cir.· 1947-03-04 ·cited 12×·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 granted enforcement of the Board's order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Am. White Cross Labs., Inc.
  160 F.2d 75· 2d Cir.· 1947-02-19 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the company's discharge of an employee for testifying at a Board hearing and for union activity violated the National Labor Relations Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Standard OIL Co.
  142 F.2d 676· 6th Cir.· 1944-03-20 ·cited 12×
  The court held that a specific provision of the National Labor Relations Board order must be amended to clarify employees' freedom to join any union, and another provision must be eliminated, before the order is enforced.
• Consol. Aircraft Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  141 F.2d 785· 9th Cir.· 1944-03-17 ·cited 12×
  The court held that certain unilateral actions by the Company interfered with employees' rights to collective bargaining, but other actions did not. The court modified and enforced the National Labor Relations Board's cease and desist order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cities Serv. Oil Co.
  129 F.2d 933· 2d Cir.· 1942-07-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the employer is responsible for the actions of its employee, Powers, in interfering with union activities and dominating labor organizations, and that the discharges of five employees were retaliatory.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Arma Corp. (independent Instrument Makers & MacHinists Council
  122 F.2d 153· 2d Cir.· 1941-07-23 ·cited 12×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order to disestablish a company-dominated union was not warranted, but upheld findings of discriminatory discharges for union activity.
• Int'l Bhd. OF Elec. Workers, Local 803, AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  826 F.2d 1283· 3d Cir.· 1987-08-19 ·cited 11×
  A broad, general no-strike clause in a collective bargaining agreement can constitute a clear and unmistakable waiver of employees' right to engage in sympathy strikes, even without specific language addressing sympathy strikes.
• Fla. Marble Polishers Health & Welf. Tr. Fund v. Edwin M. Green, Inc.
  653 F.2d 972· 5th Cir.· 1981-08-17 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the two corporations, EMG and GPS, are separate employers and not a single employer under the NLRA, and thus GPS is not bound by the collective bargaining agreement signed by EMG.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Visceglia
  498 F.2d 43· 3d Cir.· 1974-05-21 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's finding of an unfair labor practice was not supported by substantial evidence in the record as a whole, even assuming the applicability of the Babcock balancing test.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Vare
  206 F.2d 543· 3d Cir.· 1953-07-21 ·cited 11×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that amended charges, which alleged new and different unfair labor practices against a different employer than the original timely charges, were not valid amendments and were barred by the Section 10(b) six-month limitation period.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Van de Kamp's Holland-Dutch Bakers, Inc.
  152 F.2d 818· 9th Cir.· 1946-01-07 ·cited 11×
  The court held that the Company's use of out-of-state materials was sufficient to bring it under the National Labor Relations Act, and that substantial evidence supported the Board's findings of refusal to bargain. However, a broad "cease and desist" order was modified.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. S. Md. Hosp. Ctr.
  916 F.2d 932· 4th Cir.· 1990-10-15 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the hospital did not unlawfully prohibit union literature distribution at the main entrance and did not unlawfully conduct surveillance of union activities in the cafeteria. However, the court found that the hospital's disciplinary rules 24 and 25 were overly
• United Retail Workers Union Local 881 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  774 F.2d 752· 7th Cir.· 1985-10-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's rule requiring non-members to be allowed to vote in union merger elections, as established in Amoco Production Co., is a permissible construction of the National Labor Relations Act, and thus the employer did not commit an
• Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  759 F.2d 1477· 9th Cir.· 1985-05-13 ·cited 10×