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

• Fraser & Johnston Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  469 F.2d 1259· 9th Cir.· 1972-11-29 ·cited 18×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that while the company violated labor laws by refusing to bargain in good faith over relocation effects and by unlawfully recognizing and assisting the IBEW, the Board's order requiring recognition of the original unions at the new plant could not be enforced due t
• Landis Tool Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  460 F.2d 23· 3d Cir.· 1972-05-22 ·cited 18×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the National Labor Relations Board's finding that the employer engaged in unfair labor practices, warranting setting aside the election and ordering a new one.
• Texaco, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  462 F.2d 812· 3d Cir.· 1972-05-04 ·cited 18×
  The court held that an employer cannot prohibit the distribution of union literature on its premises during non-work time in a non-work area, even if the literature contains potentially inaccurate statements or urges employees to exert pressure on the employer, unless the stateme
• Retail Clerks Union, Local 1401, Retail Clerks Int'l Ass'n, AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  463 F.2d 316· D.C. Cir.· 1972-03-30 ·cited 18×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the Company waived its procedural objection regarding the timeliness and specificity of the Union's election objections by failing to file exceptions to the Regional Director's report recommending a hearing.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. LOU De Young's Mkt. Basket, Inc.
  406 F.2d 17· 6th Cir.· 1969-01-17 ·cited 18×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court enforced the National Labor Relations Board's order, finding that the employer committed unfair labor practices by unlawfully discharging employees and refusing to bargain with the union.
• TRW, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  393 F.2d 771· 6th Cir.· 1968-04-24 ·cited 18×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that an employer has a legal right to enforce a rule prohibiting union solicitation during working hours, and the National Labor Relations Board failed to demonstrate the rule was adopted for a discriminatory purpose.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Realist, Inc.
  328 F.2d 840· 7th Cir.· 1964-02-25 ·cited 18×
  The dissenting judge would deny enforcement of the Board's order, arguing the company president's speech did not constitute an unfair labor practice.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 369 Int'l HOD Carriers' Bldg. & Common Laborers' Union OF Am.
  240 F.2d 539· 3d Cir.· 1956-12-03 ·cited 18×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order was too broad and should not have included a general prohibition against restraining employees' rights, as the specific violation found did not justify such a sweeping injunction.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Charles R. Krimm Lumber Co.
  203 F.2d 194· 2d Cir.· 1953-04-02 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order against the respondents for unfair labor practices was supported by substantial evidence and should be enforced, including against a successor corporation.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Jarka Corp. of Philadelphia
  198 F.2d 618· 3d Cir.· 1952-08-15 ·cited 18×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the union's actions in causing the employer to discriminate against non-union workers constituted an unfair labor practice under Section 8(b)(2) of the National Labor Relations Act.
• Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of ST. Louis v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  195 F.2d 955· 8th Cir.· 1952-04-29 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the Board's findings of unfair labor practices were supported by substantial evidence, but modified the Board's order regarding notification of employee revocation of union authority.
• J. A. Bentley Lumber Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  180 F.2d 641· 5th Cir.· 1950-03-11 ·cited 18×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings and order were supported by substantial evidence and granted the Board's request for enforcement.
• United Biscuit Co. of Am. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  128 F.2d 771· 7th Cir.· 1942-06-17 ·cited 18×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer was not obligated to reinstate or provide back pay to employees who struck in violation of their contract, but upheld the Board's finding of discriminatory discharge for other employees.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Grower-Shipper Vegetable Ass'n of Cent. Cal.
  122 F.2d 368· 9th Cir.· 1941-07-21 ·cited 18×
  The court should sustain the Board's finding that the Association's proposal to bargain only for its members constituted a refusal to bargain collectively.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Deauville Hotel
  751 F.2d 1562· 11th Cir.· 1985-02-08 ·cited 17×
  The court held that an employer can enforce a no-strike clause once a reasonable time has passed for employees to be informed of the new contract, and that purely personal griping by an employee is not protected activity under the NLRA.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Elias Bros. Rests., Inc.
  496 F.2d 1165· 6th Cir.· 1974-05-29 ·cited 17×
  The court held that discharging an employee for engaging in protected concerted activities, even if other reasons also contributed to the discharge, violates the National Labor Relations Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Laars Eng'rs, Inc.
  332 F.2d 664· 9th Cir.· 1964-06-08 ·cited 17×
  The court held that while the employer's accelerated wage increase was substantial evidence of an intent to thwart union organizing, certain statements in the employer's pre-election letter were protected free speech and did not constitute an unfair labor practice.
• John Morrell & Co. v. Local Union 304A OF the United Food & Commercial Workers, AFL-CIO
  913 F.2d 544· 8th Cir.· 1990-09-07 ·cited 16×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that a no-strike clause limited to disputes subject to the contract's peaceful settlement procedures does not clearly and unmistakably waive the right to engage in sympathy strikes.
• Slaughter v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  794 F.2d 120· 3d Cir.· 1986-06-27 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's (NLRB) decision to overrule precedent and dismiss an unfair labor practice complaint based on the premise that the Act compelled such a result was erroneous.
• Passaic Daily News v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  736 F.2d 1543· D.C. Cir.· 1984-06-15 ·cited 16×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order to cease and desist from unfair labor practices is enforceable, but the order to resume publication of Stoddard's column is denied enforcement due to First Amendment concerns.
• MacHinists Local 1327, Int'l Ass'n OF MacHinists & Aerospace Workers, AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  725 F.2d 1212· 9th Cir.· 1984-02-14 ·cited 16×
  A union rule that imposes a court-collectible fine on a member who resigns during a strike to work for the struck employer is a reasonable restriction on the right to resign and does not violate national labor policy.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Knogo Corp.
  727 F.2d 55· 2d Cir.· 1984-02-03 ·cited 16×
  The court granted enforcement of the National Labor Relations Board's orders except for the bargaining order, finding that the Board failed to consider the passage of time and employee turnover, which rendered the bargaining order inappropriate.
• Int'l Union OF Operating Eng'rs Local 406, AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  701 F.2d 504· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-28 ·cited 16×
  The court affirmed the NLRB's decision, holding that the union committed unfair labor practices by retaliating against an employee through discriminatory job referrals and by surreptitiously changing hiring hall rules to deny him opportunities.
• Marathon LeTOURNEAU Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  699 F.2d 248· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-28 ·cited 16×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices by Marathon LeTourneau Company were supported by substantial evidence, and therefore, the Board's order would be enforced.
• City Disposal Sys., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  683 F.2d 1005· 6th Cir.· 1982-07-22 ·cited 16×
  An employee's refusal to operate a vehicle due to safety concerns is not protected concerted activity under Section 7 if it is solely on behalf of the individual employee and not made with the object of inducing group action.
• Nat'l Elec. Contractors Ass'n, Inc. v. Nat'l Constructors Ass'n
  678 F.2d 492· 4th Cir.· 1982-05-17 ·cited 16×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The dissenting judge would hold that the agreement is not per se illegal under the Sherman Act and that venue was improper for two defendants.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nat'l CAR Rental Sys., Inc.
  672 F.2d 1182· 3d Cir.· 1982-02-18 ·cited 16×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the Board abused its discretion in issuing a bargaining order and erred in reversing the ALJ's finding that the union waived its right to bargain over the effects of the facility transfer.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Eldorado Mfg. Corp. & United Steelworkers of Am., AFL-CIO
  660 F.2d 1207· 7th Cir.· 1981-09-24 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the majority improperly substituted its judgment for the Board's findings of fact and that substantial evidence supported the Board's conclusion that the Union and Company colluded to discharge employees.
• The Procter & Gamble Mfg. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  658 F.2d 968· 4th Cir.· 1981-09-04 ·cited 16×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the Board's order compelling the employer to make premises available and reimburse union for rental costs was beyond its remedial power.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. The Am. CAN Co.
  658 F.2d 746· 10th Cir.· 1981-08-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order enforcing a superseniority clause against the company and unions is enforceable, despite the Board members' divergent rationales, because the order is consistent with the Act and supported by substantial evidence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Arrow Molded Plastics, Inc.
  653 F.2d 280· 6th Cir.· 1981-07-13 ·cited 16×
  The court held that Arrow's unfair labor practices were not so pervasive as to justify a bargaining order, but were sufficient to warrant enforcement of the Board's cease and desist order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Kiawah Island Co., Ltd.
  650 F.2d 485· 4th Cir.· 1981-05-27 ·cited 16×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court should have found substantial evidence that Kiawah discriminatorily discharged Hymes and Murray due to their union organizing efforts.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Container Corp. OF Am.
  649 F.2d 1213· 6th Cir.· 1981-05-18 ·cited 16×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the company violated the NLRA by threatening to discipline an employee for posting an anti-management notice, but that there was insufficient evidence to support the NLRB's finding that a manager threatened another employee.
• Amcar Division v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  641 F.2d 561· 8th Cir.· 1981-02-09 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the union's repeated attempts to negotiate exceptions to the no-strike clause, coupled with the Absence Control Program and the parties' conduct, demonstrated a clear and unmistakable waiver of the employees' right to engage in sympathy strikes.
• Monteiro v. Poole Silver Co.
  615 F.2d 4· 1st Cir.· 1980-02-14 ·cited 16×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  An employee's insincere or bad-faith accusations of discrimination, made to defend against legitimate employer criticism, do not constitute protected "opposition" under Title VII's anti-retaliation provision.
• J. P. Stevens & Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  612 F.2d 881· 4th Cir.· 1980-01-08 ·cited 16×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the Board's remedial order for unfair labor practices and that the Board did not err in denying the Union's motions.
• Stein Seal Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  605 F.2d 703· 3d Cir.· 1979-09-04 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the employer's implied threat of retaliation and restriction of an employee's movement constituted unfair labor practices, but the employee's discharge was not motivated by union activity.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Apollo Tire Co., Inc.
  604 F.2d 1180· 9th Cir.· 1979-08-14 ·cited 16×
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ne. Univ.
  601 F.2d 1208· 1st Cir.· 1979-06-26 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the university did not dominate the Weekly Staff Cabinet (WSC) as it lacked evidence of actual domination, but did violate Section 8(a)(1) by denying a group access to facilities for discussing wages and working conditions.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Owners Maint. Corp.
  581 F.2d 44· 2d Cir.· 1978-07-19 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board properly refused to defer to an arbitrator's award and that the company violated the National Labor Relations Act by discharging two employees for engaging in protected union and concerted activities.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Massachusetts MacHine AND Stamping
  578 F.2d 15· 1st Cir.· 1978-06-28 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the Company did not violate Section 8(a)(5) by refusing to bargain, as it had a good faith doubt of the Union's majority status following relocation. However, the court affirmed the finding of a Section 8(a)(1) violation.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dawson Cabinet Co., Inc.
  566 F.2d 1079· 8th Cir.· 1977-12-13 ·cited 16×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
• Retail Clerks Local 588, Retail Clerks Int'l Ass'n, AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  565 F.2d 769· D.C. Cir.· 1977-11-04 ·cited 16×·via Section 7 Rights
  Invoking the grievance-arbitration machinery to resolve a colorable contract interpretation issue, without striking or picketing, is not an unfair labor practice under the National Labor Relations Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sencore, Inc.
  558 F.2d 433· 8th Cir.· 1977-06-23 ·cited 16×
  The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the National Labor Relations Board's findings that Sencore violated the National Labor Relations Act by interfering with employee rights and discharging employees for protected concerted activity and union activity.
• Crenlo v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  529 F.2d 201· 8th Cir.· 1975-12-31 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the discharge of five first-shift employees for participating in brief, protected work stoppages protesting wages was wrongful, but the discharge of a sixth employee, Brakke, was not discriminatory despite a potentially overbroad 'no solicitation' rule, as it
• Am. Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  521 F.2d 1159· 2d Cir.· 1975-07-29 ·cited 16×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order finding AT&T committed an unfair labor practice by disciplining an employee for rude conduct during collective bargaining activities must be enforced, despite the court's reservations about the triviality of the matte
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cast Optics Corp.
  458 F.2d 398· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-23 ·cited 16×·via National Labor Relations Act § 7
  The court held that the Company's refusal to bargain with the Union and its discharge/refusal to reinstate strikers constituted unfair labor practices, as its condonation of an earlier illegal work stoppage was not vitiated by subsequent employee conduct.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Clapper's Mfg., Inc.
  458 F.2d 414· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-08 ·cited 16×·via Section 7 Rights
  The court held that the employer committed unfair labor practices by interfering with employee rights and dominating a labor organization, and that procedural errors in affidavit review were harmless.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. RED TOP CAB & Baggage Co.
  383 F.2d 547· 5th Cir.· 1967-10-06 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's finding that the employee's discharge was unlawfully motivated by protected concerted activities was not supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. TOM Johnson, Inc.
  378 F.2d 342· 9th Cir.· 1967-05-17 ·cited 16×
  The court held that the employer violated the National Labor Relations Act by bargaining directly with employees and unilaterally changing terms of employment, and by discharging employees for union-related activities.