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. Intertherm, Inc.
  596 F.2d 267· 8th Cir.· 1979-03-19 ·cited 58×
  The court granted enforcement of the NLRB's order regarding seven of the ten alleged violations, finding that Intertherm interfered with, restrained, or coerced employees exercising their rights under the NLRA. Enforcement was refused for three alleged violations.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. The Kostel Corp.
  440 F.2d 347· 7th Cir.· 1971-02-25 ·cited 58×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the Labor Board did not err in finding the Kankakee store an appropriate bargaining unit and that Kostel Corporation violated Section 8(a)(5) by refusing to bargain. The court also found a bargaining order appropriate.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nat'l Container Corp.
  211 F.2d 525· 2d Cir.· 1954-03-10 ·cited 58×
  The court held that the employer unlawfully supported a union by entering into a collective bargaining agreement while objections to a prior election were pending, and that the Board's application of its new waiver rule was not improper.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Air Assocs., Inc.
  121 F.2d 586· 2d Cir.· 1941-07-09 ·cited 58×·via Section 7 Of The Act
  The court held that alleged bias of a trial examiner is immaterial if the Board ignores the examiner's report and relies solely on the evidence, and that changed circumstances did not warrant modifying the Board's order.
• Clear Pine Mouldings, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  632 F.2d 721· 9th Cir.· 1980-07-25 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board correctly applied the law and its findings of fact were supported by substantial evidence, affirming the Board's decision that Clear Pine violated the National Labor Relations Act through improper interrogation, reprimand, un
• ARO, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  596 F.2d 713· 6th Cir.· 1979-04-20 ·cited 56×·via Section 7 Concerted Activity
  The court held that an individual employee's complaints, made solely on their own behalf and lacking a colorable basis in the collective bargaining agreement, do not constitute protected concerted activity under the National Labor Relations Act.
• Alfred M. Lewis, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  587 F.2d 403· 9th Cir.· 1978-09-13 ·cited 56×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer violated the NLRA by unilaterally implementing production standards and denying union representation at investigatory interviews, but not at final disciplinary meetings. The Board's remedy of reinstatement and back pay was largely upheld.
• First Lakewood Assocs. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  582 F.2d 416· 7th Cir.· 1978-08-09 ·cited 56×
  The court held that while the employer committed several unfair labor practices under § 8(a)(1), the extraordinary remedy of a bargaining order was not warranted due to insufficient evidence of a card majority at the time of demand and a lack of specific findings regarding the im
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Pope Maint. Corp.
  573 F.2d 898· 5th Cir.· 1978-05-26 ·cited 56×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that Pope Maintenance Corporation is a statutory employer subject to the National Labor Relations Act, and its order to cease and desist unfair labor practices, reinstate strikers, and bargain with the union is enforceable.
• Larand Leisurelies, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  523 F.2d 814· 6th Cir.· 1975-10-01 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices and its classification of the strike as an unfair labor practice strike were supported by substantial evidence.
• Automated Bus. Sys. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  497 F.2d 262· 6th Cir.· 1974-05-23 ·cited 56×
  The court held that a finding of employer's good faith doubt does not equate to an actual loss of union majority, and the presumption of majority status should only be overcome by objective evidence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. N. Metal Co.
  440 F.2d 881· 3d Cir.· 1971-04-06 ·cited 56×
  The court held that an employee's efforts to enforce a collective bargaining agreement provision constitute 'concerted activity' per se under the National Labor Relations Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Adams Dairy, Inc.
  350 F.2d 108· 8th Cir.· 1965-09-08 ·cited 56×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that Adams Dairy's decision to terminate its distribution business and sell products to independent contractors was not a mandatory subject of collective bargaining under the National Labor Relations Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Schill Steel Prods., Inc.
  340 F.2d 568· 5th Cir.· 1965-01-11 ·cited 56×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the National Labor Relations Board's findings that Schill Steel Products violated the National Labor Relations Act by interrogating employees, threatening them with loss of benefits, discriminatorily discharging two employees for
• Iowa Beef Packers, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  331 F.2d 176· 8th Cir.· 1964-04-28 ·cited 56×
  The court held that the employer violated Section 8(a)(2) by recognizing one union while a question of representation existed, influenced by its own unfair labor practices. However, the court reversed the Board's order to reinstate an employee for a Section 8(a)(4) violation due
• Red Star Exp. Lines of Auburn, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  196 F.2d 78· 2d Cir.· 1952-04-14 ·cited 56×·via Section 7 Rights
  The dissent argues that the parties' contract addendum did not constitute an unfair labor practice, as there was no substantial evidence of intent to deceive employees or to continue a 'closed shop' after the addendum's effective date.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. S. Cal. Edison Co.
  646 F.2d 1352· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-01 ·cited 55×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that employees have a statutory right to honor lawful picket lines, even at a customer's premises, and this right is not waived by a general no-strike clause unless the waiver is clear and unmistakable.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Beth Israel Hosp.
  554 F.2d 477· 1st Cir.· 1977-04-29 ·cited 55×
  The court held that the hospital's rule prohibiting union solicitation and literature distribution in its cafeteria and coffee shop was invalid, but it would not enforce the Board's broader finding of a violation regarding all non-patient-care areas based on an ambiguous footnote
• Angle v. Sacks
  382 F.2d 655· 10th Cir.· 1967-08-28 ·cited 54×
  The court held that a temporary injunction under § 10(j) of the NLRA is appropriate when there is reasonable cause to believe unfair labor practices have occurred and a probability that the Act's purposes will be frustrated without such relief.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. THE Newton Co.
  236 F.2d 438· 5th Cir.· 1956-09-06 ·cited 54×
  The court held that while the company interfered with employee rights and discriminatorily discharged one employee for union activity, other alleged violations, including the layoff of sixteen employees and a wage increase, were not supported by substantial evidence.
• Morand Bros. Bev. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  190 F.2d 576· 7th Cir.· 1951-07-23 ·cited 54×
  The court held that while employers may have the right to lock out employees in response to a strike, the Board's finding of a discharge, rather than a lockout, was not sufficiently clear and required remand for clarification. The court affirmed the Board's order regarding one em
• J. P. Stevens & Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  441 F.2d 514· 5th Cir.· 1971-03-22 ·cited 53×
  The court concurred in the enforcement of the Board's order, granting a bargaining order without a rerun election.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Challenge-Cook Bros. OF Ohio, Inc.
  374 F.2d 147· 6th Cir.· 1967-03-02 ·cited 53×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer discriminatorily discharged an employee due to union activity and unlawfully removed union meeting notices from bulletin boards, but modified the Board's order to be more specific.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. BEN Pekin Corp.
  452 F.2d 205· 7th Cir.· 1971-10-04 ·cited 52×
  Substantial evidence supports the National Labor Relations Board's finding that an employee was discharged for protected concerted activity, making the discharge an unfair labor practice.
• United Packinghouse, Food & Allied Workers Int'l Union, Afl-Cio v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  416 F.2d 1126· D.C. Cir.· 1969-02-07 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the employer's policy and practice of discrimination can constitute a violation of the Act if proven to be invidious and on account of race or national origin.
• Serv-Air, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  395 F.2d 557· 10th Cir.· 1968-01-19 ·cited 52×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the company's no-solicitation rule was not discriminatorily promulgated or enforced, but that its 'serious harm' notice was a threat in the 1964 context. The court affirmed the Board's findings regarding the lockout of striking employees and the firemen, the m
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nat'l Shoes, Inc.
  208 F.2d 688· 2d Cir.· 1953-12-15 ·cited 52×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order was supported by substantial evidence and granted its petition for enforcement.
• Bethlehem Steel Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  120 F.2d 641· D.C. Cir.· 1941-05-12 ·cited 52×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order to cease unfair labor practices, including dominating employee representation plans and interfering with union rights, was valid and enforceable against both the parent corporation and its subsidiary.
• Fla. Steel Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  587 F.2d 735· 5th Cir.· 1979-01-11 ·cited 51×·via Section 7 Of The Act
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order was not supported by substantial evidence, as the company had just cause to discharge the employee for negligence, and the Board failed to prove anti-union animus was the motivating factor.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Appalachian Elec. Power Co.
  140 F.2d 217· 4th Cir.· 1944-01-10 ·cited 51×·via Section 7 Of The Act
  The court held that the Labor Board's order to bargain was not binding because the Board made mistakes in establishing the bargaining unit and finding company interference, and the employer should not be forced to bargain with a repudiated union without substantial evidence of wr
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Montgomery Ward & Co.
  554 F.2d 996· 10th Cir.· 1977-04-12 ·cited 50×
  The court held that Wards committed unfair labor practices by implementing a no-solicitation rule, banning union insignia, granting wage increases timed to interfere with union activity, and discriminatorily discharging a union leader, justifying a bargaining order.
• Crown Cent. Petroleum Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  430 F.2d 724· 5th Cir.· 1970-07-28 ·cited 50×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that disciplining employees for statements made during a grievance meeting, even if intemperate, did not violate Section 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act because such meetings require a free exchange of views and the conduct was not so opprobrious as to
• Int'l Union v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  392 F.2d 801· D.C. Cir.· 1967-11-14 ·cited 50×
  The court held that the company committed unfair labor practices by threatening employees, promising benefits, refusing to bargain, and coercively interrogating employees, but remanded the issue of compensatory relief for further Board consideration.
• Piasecki Aircraft Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  280 F.2d 575· 3d Cir.· 1960-06-20 ·cited 50×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer's offer to hire cured any potential violation of Section 8(a)(3) by refusing to hire based on union affiliation, as the employees rejected the offer.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Antonino Carilli
  648 F.2d 1206· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-22 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the employer committed unfair labor practices by interrogating employees, suggesting withdrawal from the union, unilaterally implementing new insurance plans, terminating trust fund payments, and refusing to bargain. Enforcement of the NLRB's order was granted
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Columbia Univ.
  541 F.2d 922· 2d Cir.· 1976-08-25 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the Board's order was unenforceable because the Board failed to articulate a clear and sufficient rationale for applying N.L.R.B. v. Weingarten, Inc. to the facts of the case.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Styletek
  520 F.2d 275· 1st Cir.· 1975-08-06 ·cited 48×
  The court held that while the company's reorganization efforts and wage plan development had legitimate business purposes, the timing of the announcement of actual wage benefits two weeks before an election supported the Board's finding of an unfair labor practice under Section 8
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Southland Paint Co., Inc.
  394 F.2d 717· 5th Cir.· 1968-05-08 ·cited 48×
  The court held that while the employer committed unfair labor practices under sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3), substantial evidence did not support the Board's finding of majority status based on authorization cards, thus the mandatory bargaining order was not enforced.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Capitol Fish Co.
  294 F.2d 868· 5th Cir.· 1961-09-27 ·cited 48×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the exclusion of the investigating attorney's testimony was an error because it was material, not privileged, and the agency cannot unilaterally determine privilege.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Somerset Classics, Inc.
  193 F.2d 613· 2d Cir.· 1952-01-14 ·cited 48×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the National Labor Relations Board's findings that the respondents engaged in unfair labor practices by refusing to bargain with a union and discriminating against union employees. The court also found that the companies were mut
• Elastic Stop Nut Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  142 F.2d 371· 8th Cir.· 1944-05-01 ·cited 48×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices were supported by substantial evidence, including foreman's statements and employer's assistance to an unaffiliated union.
• Carpenters' Local Union NO. 1478 v. Stevens
  743 F.2d 1271· 9th Cir.· 1984-08-01 ·cited 47×
  The court held that an arbitrator's award drawing its essence from a collective bargaining agreement should be affirmed.
• Conair Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  721 F.2d 1355· D.C. Cir.· 1983-11-15 ·cited 47×·via Section 7 Rights
  The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has the statutory authority to issue a bargaining order even in the absence of a demonstrated majority of employee support for a union, provided that the employer has engaged in "outrageous" and "pervasive" unfair labor practices that pre
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Browning-Ferris Indus. OF Pa., Inc.
  691 F.2d 1117· 3d Cir.· 1982-10-28 ·cited 47×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board applied the correct "joint employer" standard and that substantial evidence supported its finding that BFI exerted sufficient control over the drivers to be considered a joint employer.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Datapoint Corp.
  642 F.2d 123· 5th Cir.· 1981-04-08 ·cited 47×
  The court held that an employee's individual complaints about working conditions, even if related to mutual concerns, do not constitute protected concerted activity under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act unless there is evidence of intent to instigate group action.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Triumph Curing Ctr. & M. F. Lee
  571 F.2d 462· 9th Cir.· 1978-03-02 ·cited 46×
  The court should remand the issue of the bargaining order to the Board for findings on union violence and its coercive effect on employees' free choice.
• Holodnak v. Avco Corp.
  514 F.2d 285· 2d Cir.· 1975-02-18 ·cited 46×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that while the government's entanglement with Avco's operations warranted treating Avco's actions as governmental for First Amendment purposes, punitive damages are not available against a private party in this sui generis situation, even for a willful violation of
• J. P. Stevens & Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  417 F.2d 533· 5th Cir.· 1969-10-03 ·cited 46×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's enhanced remedies, including mailing notices to employees, reading notices aloud, granting union access to bulletin boards, and providing employee lists, were appropriate to effectuate the policies of the Act given the empl
• Gen. Elec. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  412 F.2d 512· 2d Cir.· 1969-06-09 ·cited 46×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  An employer may refuse to bargain with a union committee that includes members of other unions during preliminary, voluntary discussions, but cannot refuse to bargain with such a committee during mandatory bargaining periods absent a showing of bad faith or ulterior motive.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. The William J. Burns Int'l Detective Agency, Inc.
  346 F.2d 897· 8th Cir.· 1965-06-18 ·cited 46×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the employer's complete discontinuation of its Omaha operations for economic reasons, without anti-union motivation, did not constitute an unfair labor practice under § 8(a)(5) for failure to bargain over the contract termination. However, certain § 8(a)(1) vi