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. Sunbeam Elec. MFG. Co.
  133 F.2d 856· 7th Cir.· 1943-02-06 ·cited 28×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court should modify paragraph 1 of the order, as its broad language is not justified by the specific unfair labor practices found.
• Pueblo GAS & Fuel Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  118 F.2d 304· 10th Cir.· 1941-03-12 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board had jurisdiction over the company because its operations, including receiving out-of-state gas and supplying local businesses engaged in interstate commerce, substantially affected interstate commerce. The court also found th
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Aluminum Prods. Co.
  120 F.2d 567· 7th Cir.· 1941-03-04 ·cited 28×·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 should be enforced, with the exception of the back pay award for the plant closure.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Newark Morning Ledger Co.
  120 F.2d 262· 3d Cir.· 1941-02-03 ·cited 28×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board lacks jurisdiction to enforce an order concerning a discharge that occurred after a collective bargaining agreement was in place, as such a dispute is a private contractual matter.
• Local 814 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  512 F.2d 564· D.C. Cir.· 1975-04-30 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) must provide a reasoned explanation for its decisions, particularly when there are inconsistencies between cases, and a simple remand for supplementation is insufficient if the agency has failed to give the issue a 'ha
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sec. Plating Co., Inc.
  356 F.2d 725· 9th Cir.· 1966-02-15 ·cited 27×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the National Labor Relations Board's order finding Security Plating Company committed unfair labor practices by refusing to bargain and discriminatorily discharging employees.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Geigy Co., Inc.
  211 F.2d 553· 9th Cir.· 1954-03-17 ·cited 27×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer's anti-union statements were coercive, and the Board's order to bargain was proper despite employee turnover, though the cease and desist order was too broad.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Spiewak
  179 F.2d 695· 3d Cir.· 1950-02-02 ·cited 27×
  The court held that while the employer unlawfully assisted the union and entered into an invalid contract, the refusal to reinstate six specific strikers was justified due to opposition from the majority of employees who feared violence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dorsey Trailers, Inc.
  179 F.2d 589· 5th Cir.· 1950-01-30 ·cited 27×·via Section 7 Of The Act
  The court held that the Board erred in finding the company engaged in unfair labor practices by shutting down the plant and refusing to reinstate strike leaders, but agreed the company committed an unfair labor practice by failing to prevent an attack on a union representative.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. John Engelhorn & Sons
  134 F.2d 553· 3d Cir.· 1943-03-01 ·cited 27×·via Section 7 Rights
  A closed shop agreement is invalid if the employer assisted the labor organization through unfair labor practices, and such a contract cannot bar Board proceedings or justify discharges.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Katz
  701 F.2d 703· 7th Cir.· 1983-03-07 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the employer presented a prima facie case of election misconduct, and the Board erred in failing to conduct further investigation or a hearing.
• Spring City Knitting Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  647 F.2d 1011· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board did not abuse its discretion in determining that separate bargaining units for two plants were appropriate and in overruling objections to the election due to alleged union misconduct.
• Pelton Casteel, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  627 F.2d 23· 7th Cir.· 1980-07-18 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the employer did not violate the National Labor Relations Act by discharging an employee or by conducting individual interviews, as there was insufficient evidence of protected concerted activity or coercive interrogation.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Murray Prods., Inc.
  584 F.2d 934· 9th Cir.· 1978-10-27 ·cited 26×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the company's offers of reinstatement were invalid because they did not provide a reasonable time for consideration, and thus the company's backpay obligation was not tolled.
• D'Amico v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  582 F.2d 820· 3d Cir.· 1978-08-24 ·cited 26×
  A superseniority provision for a union recording secretary is permissible under the National Labor Relations Act if the union demonstrates that the secretary's official responsibilities substantially further the implementation of the collective bargaining agreement.
• Trs. OF Boston Univ. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  548 F.2d 391· 1st Cir.· 1977-01-28 ·cited 26×
  The court affirmed the National Labor Relations Board's order finding that Boston University violated the National Labor Relations Act by discharging an employee, and granted enforcement of the Board's reinstatement order.
• The Contract Knitter, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  545 F.2d 967· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-20 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board reasonably determined that union campaign literature containing minor misrepresentations about pay did not significantly impact the election outcome, and thus, the employer's refusal to bargain was unlawful.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Scoler's Inc.
  466 F.2d 1289· 2d Cir.· 1972-09-11 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a bargaining order was not an appropriate remedy given the specific facts of the case, despite employer violations of section 8(a)(1).
• Sw. Reg'l Joint Bd., Amalgamated Clothing Workers of Am., Afl-Cio v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  441 F.2d 1027· D.C. Cir.· 1970-12-15 ·cited 26×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the company's change in overtime calculation was not an unfair labor practice, and an assistant plant manager's conversation with an employee was not unlawfully coercive.
• The Schwarzenbach-Huber Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  408 F.2d 236· 2d Cir.· 1969-03-05 ·cited 26×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the Union did not possess a majority of valid authorization cards and that the Company's doubt of the Union's majority was made in good faith, thus setting aside the bargaining order.
• The News Union OF Baltimore v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  393 F.2d 673· D.C. Cir.· 1968-02-09 ·cited 26×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that a defensive lockout requires a finding that the union threatened the employers' interest in group bargaining.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Monroe Auto Equip. Co.
  368 F.2d 975· 8th Cir.· 1966-11-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the Board's finding that the employee's discharge was motivated by union activity was not supported by substantial evidence, but affirmed the Board's findings of other Section 8(a)(1) violations.
• Associated Home Builders OF the Greater E. BAY, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  352 F.2d 745· 9th Cir.· 1965-10-29 ·cited 26×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the Board erred in failing to consider whether the unions' unilateral imposition of production quotas and fines constituted a failure to bargain collectively under §§ 8(b)(3) and 8(d) of the Act, even though these sections were not explicitly cited in the comp
• Armco Steel Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  344 F.2d 621· 6th Cir.· 1965-04-27 ·cited 26×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  A collective bargaining agreement provision prohibiting employee distribution of literature on company property is valid, even when enforced against distribution of rival union literature, as employees can waive such rights through their bargaining representative.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hotel
  320 F.2d 254· 3d Cir.· 1963-07-10 ·cited 26×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that a union's failure to inform employees of their dues obligations, coupled with procedural irregularities in determining those obligations, prevented the union from lawfully demanding their discharge for non-payment.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. U. S. Sonics Corp.
  312 F.2d 610· 1st Cir.· 1963-01-31 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the exclusion of evidence regarding the union's good faith was prejudicial error, and that the employer's withdrawal of recognition during the certification year was improper.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. NEW England Tank Indus., Inc.
  302 F.2d 273· 1st Cir.· 1962-04-27 ·cited 26×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding that the respondent discriminatorily refused to hire former employees due to union membership, and that three employees who accepted offers but refused to report due to the respondent's actions were unfair lab
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Avondale Mills
  242 F.2d 669· 5th Cir.· 1957-03-29 ·cited 26×
  The court held that while the company's no-solicitation rule was not discriminatorily applied, there was substantial evidence to support the Board's finding that employee Jones was discriminatorily discharged.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Saxe-Glassman Shoe Corp.
  201 F.2d 238· 1st Cir.· 1953-01-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the respondent violated the National Labor Relations Act by engaging in unfair labor practices, including refusing to bargain, interrogating employees, discriminating against union adherents, and dominating a company-sponsored labor organization.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Rockaway News Supply Co., Inc.
  197 F.2d 111· 2d Cir.· 1952-05-12 ·cited 26×
  The court held that a union member does not lose statutory protection by refusing to cross a picket line, and the Board's order should be enforced.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Armour & Co.
  154 F.2d 570· 10th Cir.· 1946-11-05 ·cited 26×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that plant clerks, checkers, and cost clerks are employees under the National Labor Relations Act, and their discharges and the company's refusal to bargain were unfair labor practices. The court modified the scope of the cease and desist order.
• Corning Glass Works v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  118 F.2d 625· 2d Cir.· 1941-04-04 ·cited 26×
  The court held that the employer's interference with employees' attempts to form a plant-wide union constituted unfair labor practices, justifying disestablishment of craft unions and reinstatement of discharged employees, but modified certain reimbursement provisions.
• Avecor v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  931 F.2d 924· D.C. Cir.· 1991-04-26 ·cited 24×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the NLRB wrongly construed the firing of an employee as an unfair labor practice, neglected to explain its bargaining unit conclusion, and failed to make proper inquiries before imposing a bargaining order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Pratt & Whitney AIR Craft Div.
  789 F.2d 121· 2d Cir.· 1986-04-25 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the employer violated the NLRA by prohibiting the distribution of 'scab' literature, by failing to provide union with survey results, and by threatening employees with discharge for not calling in during a potential strike. The court affirmed the Board's findi
• Union Carbide Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  714 F.2d 657· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-16 ·cited 24×·via Section 7 Of The Act
  The court held that Union Carbide violated the Labor Management Relations Act by removing union notices from bulletin boards and confiscating union materials, but denied enforcement of the order regarding alleged threats about benefits due to insufficient evidence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Rolligon Corp.
  702 F.2d 589· 5th Cir.· 1983-04-11 ·cited 24×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the union's misuse of Board subpoenas, while improper, did not create a sufficient impression of Board endorsement to warrant setting aside the representation election, and thus the Board's bargaining order would be enforced.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. NEW York Univ. Med. Ctr.
  702 F.2d 284· 2d Cir.· 1983-01-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the leafleting activity was protected under the Act, and discipline stemming directly from it violated § 8(a)(1). However, the court remanded the case regarding the final disciplinary actions (discharge and suspension) to re-evaluate the employer's motive unde
• Giddings & Lewis, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  675 F.2d 926· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-19 ·cited 24×·via Section 7 Rights
  An employer does not violate the National Labor Relations Act by implementing seniority rules that grant permanent replacement workers priority over unreinstated strikers in the event of a layoff.
• Kohls v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  629 F.2d 173· D.C. Cir.· 1980-07-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that an employee's refusal to drive a truck he believed to be unsafe, when not asserted on behalf of other employees or in concert with the union, does not constitute protected concerted activity under the NLRA, and therefore his discharge was not an unfair labor p
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. First Nat'l Bank OF Pueblo
  623 F.2d 686· 10th Cir.· 1980-06-20 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings were not supported by substantial evidence and therefore denied enforcement of the Board's order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Wilson Freight Co.
  604 F.2d 712· 1st Cir.· 1979-08-30 ·cited 24×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board erred in finding an employee's discharge unlawful, as the Board improperly disregarded a prior arbitration award that established a legitimate, contractually permissible reason for the discharge.
• Local 627, Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs, AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  595 F.2d 844· D.C. Cir.· 1979-03-06 ·cited 24×·via Section 7 Rights
  The National Labor Relations Board did not err in determining that construction workers employed by South Prairie Construction Company constitute a separate appropriate bargaining unit from those employed by Peter Kiewit Sons' Company, despite both being subsidiaries of the same
• Drug Package, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  570 F.2d 1340· 8th Cir.· 1978-02-13 ·cited 24×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that while a prospective bargaining order for 8(a)(1) violations was appropriate, a retroactive bargaining order and reinstatement based on an 8(a)(5) violation were not, as the 8(a)(5) charge was not properly litigated and the strike was not an unfair labor practi
• Food Fair Stores, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  491 F.2d 388· 3d Cir.· 1974-01-18 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the casual drivers' unauthorized walkout, which violated the collective bargaining agreement's no-strike clause, was not protected concerted activity under Section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, and therefore the company's discharge of the participants
• Gen. Motors Acceptance Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  476 F.2d 850· 1st Cir.· 1973-04-06 ·cited 24×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that General Motors Acceptance Corporation (GMAC) violated the National Labor Relations Act by unlawfully suspending merit increases, soliciting employee disavowal of the union, and engaging in bad-faith bargaining.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Mansion House Ctr. Mgmt. Corp.
  473 F.2d 471· 8th Cir.· 1973-02-12 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board erred in excluding evidence of a union's alleged racial discrimination and in applying an incorrect standard to evaluate such claims, requiring remand.
• Colecraft Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  385 F.2d 998· 2d Cir.· 1967-11-22 ·cited 24×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that an employer cannot refuse to bargain under section 8(a)(5) if the union's recognition request is for too large a unit, even by one employee. The court also reversed the Board's findings regarding coercive effect of supervisor's statements under section 8(a)(1)
• Montgomery Ward & Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  377 F.2d 452· 6th Cir.· 1967-05-09 ·cited 24×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the company violated Section 8(a)(1) by coercively interrogating employees and threatening suspensions, but did not violate Section 8(a)(3) by discharging employees or Section 8(a)(5) by refusing to bargain.
• The J. S. Dillon & Sons Stores Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  338 F.2d 395· 10th Cir.· 1964-11-25 ·cited 24×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices were not supported by substantial evidence. The court vacated the Board's order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Harrah's Club
  337 F.2d 177· 9th Cir.· 1964-09-28 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the employer's rule prohibiting employees from wearing union buttons did not violate Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA because the employees' actions lacked a protected purpose and the employer had a legitimate interest in maintaining its public image and discipline