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. M & W Marine Ways, Inc.
  411 F.2d 1070· 5th Cir.· 1969-06-09 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the post-petition conversations between supervisor Frey and employees Jacobi and Bourgeois did not constitute unfair labor practices under Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA, as they were informal, not coercive, and not supported by substantial evidence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Frazier, Inc.
  411 F.2d 1161· 8th Cir.· 1969-06-05 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the employer violated the NLRA by promising pension benefits to an employee to deter union activity, but remanded the issue of discharge for further Board review due to an examiner's error.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. KAY Elecs., Inc.
  410 F.2d 499· 8th Cir.· 1969-04-30 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that there was insufficient evidence to support the Board's finding that Della Galloway's discharge was motivated by union activity, but affirmed the Board's findings regarding Mary Grass's discharge and other unfair labor practices.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Harry T. Campbell Sons' Corp.
  407 F.2d 969· 4th Cir.· 1969-02-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Board's designation of a bargaining unit for calcite employees was supported by substantial evidence and within its discretion, and that the employer's other contentions were without merit.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Electro Motive MFG. Co., Inc.
  389 F.2d 61· 4th Cir.· 1968-01-26 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board has the authority to order the reinstatement of a supervisor discharged for cooperating with a Board investigation, as such a discharge violates the National Labor Relations Act.
• The Visador Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  386 F.2d 276· 4th Cir.· 1967-10-26 ·cited 6×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the employer did not violate the Act by discharging Roberts, Forward, Low, or Weatherford (first discharge), nor by discharging supervisor Pendergast, but did violate the Act through certain interrogations and threats. The discharge of Williams was found to be
• Skyline Homes, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  381 F.2d 706· 5th Cir.· 1967-08-11 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Skyline Homes, Inc. was in civil contempt for disobeying a prior decree enforcing an NLRB order, based on evidence of bad faith in dealing with the union.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Mark J. Gerry, Inc.
  355 F.2d 727· 9th Cir.· 1966-01-05 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the Board exceeded its remedial authority by invalidating a collective bargaining agreement that predated the employer's unfair labor practices.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dubo Mfg. Corp.
  353 F.2d 157· 6th Cir.· 1965-11-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's orders finding the employer engaged in unfair labor practices by refusing to bargain and by refusing to reinstate striking employees were supported by substantial evidence and should be enforced.
• Linn v. United Plant Guard Workers OF Am.
  337 F.2d 68· 6th Cir.· 1964-10-13 ·cited 6×
  The National Labor Relations Board's exclusive jurisdiction preempts federal diversity jurisdiction over libel claims arising from union organizing campaigns, even if the statements are false and malicious.
• OIL v. Ark. La. GAS Co.
  332 F.2d 64· 10th Cir.· 1964-05-25 ·cited 6×
  Federal law preempts state intervention in peaceful labor disputes affecting commerce, even when the state action is intended to facilitate settlement through public findings and recommendations.
• Marydale Prods. Co., Inc. v. United Packinghouse Workers of Am., Afl-Cio
  322 F.2d 224· 5th Cir.· 1963-09-04 ·cited 6×·via 29 U.S.C. § 157
  The court held that the district court correctly dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction, as claims involving unfair labor practices under the NLRA are within the exclusive purview of the National Labor Relations Board.
• Gen. Motors Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  303 F.2d 428· 6th Cir.· 1962-06-08 ·cited 6×
  An "agency shop arrangement," requiring employees to pay union dues or fees in lieu of membership as a condition of employment, is not lawful under the National Labor Relations Act and thus an employer is not required to bargain over such a proposal.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Floridan Hotel OF Tampa, Inc.
  300 F.2d 204· 5th Cir.· 1962-03-09 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order prohibiting the hotel from enforcing a rule against wearing union insignia was too broad. The rule, as applied to all employees regardless of public contact, was not supported by the Board's findings.
• Int'l Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, Afl-Cio v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  299 F.2d 114· D.C. Cir.· 1962-01-25 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board applied its rule regarding employer knowledge of concerted activity too strictly in this case.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Wash. Aluminum Co., Inc.
  291 F.2d 869· 4th Cir.· 1961-06-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Labor Board's order should be enforced because the employees' walkout constituted protected concerted activity, despite the employer's argument that no specific demand was made.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. United Rubber, Cork, Linoleum & Plastic Workers OF Am., AFL-CIO
  269 F.2d 694· 4th Cir.· 1959-06-26 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  A labor union's picketing and boycott campaign to force employer recognition after employees have rejected the union in a Board-conducted election constitutes an unfair labor practice under § 8(b)(1)(A) of the NLRA.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nat'l Org. Masters, Mates & Pilots OF Am., Inc., AFL-CIO
  253 F.2d 66· 7th Cir.· 1958-03-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order finding unfair labor practices by the respondent unions was not supported by substantial evidence. The court found the unions' actions did not restrain or coerce employees under the National Labor Relations Act.
• General Drivers v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  247 F.2d 71· D.C. Cir.· 1957-05-09 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists
  241 F.2d 695· 9th Cir.· 1957-02-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a union security agreement provision requiring discharge for non-payment of dues is valid, and an invalid provision regarding assessments does not invalidate the dues provision. The court also found that a provision requiring former members to resume paying du
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Holger Hansen
  220 F.2d 733· 1st Cir.· 1955-03-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that respondents' failure to raise objections before the Board precludes them from doing so on appeal, absent extraordinary circumstances.
• Local Union NO. 1229 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  202 F.2d 186· D.C. Cir.· 1952-11-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the Board erred in denying protection to the employees' concerted activity without finding the means used were unlawful.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Wytheville Knitting Mills, Inc.
  175 F.2d 238· 3d Cir.· 1949-06-01 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer was not required to reinstate two employees whose abusive conduct caused their co-workers to refuse to work with them, as such conduct was not protected concerted activity.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Enid Co-Op. Creamery Ass'n
  169 F.2d 986· 10th Cir.· 1948-08-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that statements by supervisory employees, while intended to persuade employees against unionization, did not constitute unlawful coercion or interference under the National Labor Relations Act, and thus the NLRB order was not enforceable.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Perfect Circle Co.
  162 F.2d 566· 7th Cir.· 1947-06-19 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the forcible denial of an employer's right to access its property is equivalent to a seizure within the meaning of the Fansteel case.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Holtville ICE & Cold Storage Co.
  148 F.2d 168· 9th Cir.· 1945-02-28 ·cited 6×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board had jurisdiction and that its findings of unfair labor practices, including employer domination of a union and discriminatory hiring, were substantially supported by the evidence.
• Big Lake Oil Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  146 F.2d 967· 5th Cir.· 1945-01-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while the company's letter was not coercive, the actions of its assistant superintendent in questioning benefits, assisting with ballots, providing transportation, and making post-election threats constituted unfair labor practices.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Revlon Prods. Corp.
  144 F.2d 88· 2d Cir.· 1944-07-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order to cease and desist unfair labor practices, reinstate employees, and provide back pay was enforceable, even after the death of one employee and the enlistment of another, and despite a subsequent collective bargaining
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Stremel
  141 F.2d 317· 10th Cir.· 1944-03-02 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a mine shutdown intended to discourage union membership constitutes discrimination under Section 8(3) and (1) of the NLRA, and such findings are conclusive if supported by substantial evidence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Register PUB. Co.
  141 F.2d 156· 9th Cir.· 1944-02-28 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer's refusal to sign a collective bargaining agreement constituted an unfair labor practice, but the finding of discriminatory discharge and refusal to reinstate employees was unsupported by evidence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Brown Paper Mill Co., Inc.
  133 F.2d 988· 5th Cir.· 1943-02-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices and discriminatory discharges were supported by substantial evidence and enforced the Board's order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Keystone Freight Lines
  126 F.2d 414· 10th Cir.· 1941-11-10 ·cited 6×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices, including employer domination of a union and discriminatory discharge of employees due to union activity, were supported by substantial evidence and that the Board's order should be enfor
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Arcade-Sunshine Co., Inc.
  122 F.2d 964· D.C. Cir.· 1941-10-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a petition for contempt verified on information and belief is sufficient, and that the petition stated charges with enough particularity to proceed.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Highland Shoe, Inc.
  119 F.2d 218· 1st Cir.· 1941-04-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the respondent's direct dealings with employees regarding wages and its instigation of a strike to avoid bargaining constituted unfair labor practices under the National Labor Relations Act, and the Board's order for the respondent to bargain was valid even if
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Advance Transp. Co.
  965 F.2d 186· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-22 ·cited 4×
  The court enforced the NLRB's order, finding that Advance Transportation Company unlawfully terminated Daniel Tuffs due to his protected opposition to a compulsory profit-sharing plan, and that the company also unlawfully terminated Donovan Bauldry.
• United States Dep't OF Just. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth.
  955 F.2d 998· 5th Cir.· 1992-03-19 ·cited 4×
  Uniformed border patrol agents do not have a statutory or constitutional right to wear union lapel pins on their uniforms while on duty, and the INS's policy prohibiting such adornments is justified.
• United States v. Int'l Bhd. OF Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers OF Am., AFL-CIO
  968 F.2d 1472· 2d Cir.· 1991-11-22 ·cited 4×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the Election Officer's order requiring Commercial Carriers to allow campaign stickers on its vehicles was not supported by the All Writs Act and federal labor law, and thus reversed the district court's affirmation of that order and vacated sanctions.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Brookshire Grocery Co.
  919 F.2d 359· 5th Cir.· 1990-12-19 ·cited 4×
• Int'l Bhd. OF Boilermakers v. Local Lodge D129 OF the Cement
  910 F.2d 1056· 2d Cir.· 1990-08-09 ·cited 4×
  A labor union's trusteeship imposed on a local lodge is invalid if the local lodge has fewer than ten members at the time of imposition, as it is automatically disbanded and no longer a subordinate body.
• Sierra Publ'g Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  889 F.2d 210· 9th Cir.· 1989-11-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that discharging employees for sending a letter to advertisers criticizing management and linking the newspaper's decline to stalled labor negotiations was protected concerted activity under the NLRA, as the letter was related to the labor dispute and not so disloy
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 54, Hotel Emps. & Rest. Emps. Int'l Union, AFL-CIO
  887 F.2d 28· 3d Cir.· 1989-10-05 ·cited 4×
  A union violates Section 8(b)(1)(A) by disciplining employees who change to financial core status and cross a picket line, even if the union constitution does not recognize such status.
• Slaughter v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  876 F.2d 11· 3d Cir.· 1989-05-30 ·cited 4×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's conclusion that Weingarten rights do not extend to non-union employees is a permissible construction of Section 7 of the Act, and thus the court must defer to the Board's judgment.
• EL Gran Combo de Puerto RICO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  853 F.2d 996· 1st Cir.· 1988-08-03 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the musicians' attempts to solicit support from bandmates regarding record proceeds constituted protected concerted activity under Section 7 of the NLRA, and their discharges for these activities were unlawful.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Amateyus, Ltd.
  817 F.2d 996· 2d Cir.· 1987-05-01 ·cited 4×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court affirmed the NLRB's order, finding Amateyus adopted its predecessor's collective bargaining agreement and that Vulcan was Amateyus's alter ego, thus both were bound by the agreement.
• Rockwell Int'l Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  814 F.2d 1530· 11th Cir.· 1987-04-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the National Labor Relations Board's findings that Rockwell International Corporation violated Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act by threatening, warning, and discharging an employee due to her union involvement
• In re the Arb. Between Local ONE Amalgamated Lithographers OF Am. affiliated with Int'l Typographical Union AFL-CIO v. Stearns & Beale, Inc.
  812 F.2d 763· 2d Cir.· 1987-02-23 ·cited 4×·via Section 7 Rights
  The Joint Committee's award, when interpreted to only address work assignments and treat reassignment language as surplusage, should be affirmed.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Certified Grocers OF Ill., Inc.
  806 F.2d 744· 7th Cir.· 1986-11-21 ·cited 4×
  An employer's oral statements regarding confidentiality of employee information, made in response to specific questions and in context, cannot reasonably be interpreted as an overbroad rule forbidding disclosure of nonconfidential information, and thus do not violate the National
• Rest. Corp. OF Am. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  801 F.2d 1390· D.C. Cir.· 1986-09-26 ·cited 4×
  The court held that an employer's disparate enforcement of a no-solicitation rule does not violate the NLRA unless the permitted nonunion solicitations have a potential for interference with work substantially equivalent to union solicitations. Social solicitations for employee g
• R.B. Elec., Inc. v. Local 569, Int'l Bhd. OF Elec. Workers, AFL-CIO
  781 F.2d 1440· 9th Cir.· 1986-02-10 ·cited 4×
  The court held that a district court should not grant relief to avoid arbitration unless the contract clause is facially invalid under federal labor law, which was not demonstrated here.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sherwood Trucking Co.
  775 F.2d 744· 6th Cir.· 1985-10-28 ·cited 4×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court denied enforcement of the NLRB's order because there was not substantial evidence to support the finding that Phillips was a supervisor at the critical times, rendering statements about union affiliation inadmissible hearsay and failing to establish unlawful discriminat