Section 7 Rights

400 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · browse and sort

• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. United Techs. Corp.
  706 F.2d 1254· 2d Cir.· 1983-04-21 ·cited 13×
  The Supreme Court's decision in Magnavox establishes that employers cannot restrict employees' union solicitation rights during non-working hours, and unions cannot waive these rights, thus precluding collateral estoppel effect for prior decisions that allowed such restrictions.
• Howard Johnson Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  702 F.2d 1· 1st Cir.· 1983-03-02 ·cited 13×
  The court held that discharging a supervisor for refusing to identify union supporters constitutes an unfair labor practice, as it interferes with employees' Section 7 rights.
• Ewing v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  861 F.2d 353· 2d Cir.· 1988-11-04 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's interpretation of 'concerted activity' under Section 7 of the NLRA, requiring a link to group action, is a reasonable construction of the Act, even if it means individual invocation of statutory employment rights may not be
• Eisenberg v. Lenape Prods., Inc.
  781 F.2d 999· 3d Cir.· 1986-01-22 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the district court abused its discretion by finding that injunctive relief was not necessary to prevent harm to employees' right to engage in concerted activity pending final relief.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Holyoke Water Power Co.
  778 F.2d 49· 1st Cir.· 1985-11-27 ·cited 12×
  An employer must allow a non-employee union representative access to its plant to measure noise levels in a particularly noisy room, as the union's representative is entitled to such access.
• DeQUEEN Gen. Hosp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  744 F.2d 612· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-18 ·cited 12×
  The court should not enforce the Board's issuance of a bargaining order for Units A and B because the record does not support the findings of majority support or the necessity of such an order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ajax Tool Works
  713 F.2d 1307· 7th Cir.· 1983-08-02 ·cited 12×
  The court held that employee Piotrowski was a supervisor under the NLRA and that the employer unlawfully interrogated employees about their union activities, granting enforcement of the Board's order.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hasbro Indus., Inc.
  672 F.2d 978· 1st Cir.· 1982-02-03 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the Board failed to prove that wage increases were timed to influence the election, but affirmed findings that certain employer letters and employee interrogations constituted unfair labor practices.
• Pease Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  666 F.2d 1044· 6th Cir.· 1981-12-16 ·cited 12×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices were not supported by substantial evidence, and therefore, the Board's order could not be enforced.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Circle A & W Prods. Co.
  647 F.2d 924· 9th Cir.· 1981-06-08 ·cited 12×
  The court should not infer the Board's reasoning but should remand for clarification of the contract-bar rule's application.
• 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).
• 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.
• 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×
  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.
• 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×
  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×
  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×
  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.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Whiting Milk Corp.
  342 F.2d 8· 1st Cir.· 1965-02-26 ·cited 12×
  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.
• Butcher BOY Refrigerator Door Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  290 F.2d 22· 7th Cir.· 1961-04-27 ·cited 12×
  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. Roberts Bros.
  225 F.2d 58· 9th Cir.· 1955-06-30 ·cited 12×
  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. S. S. Coachman & Sons, Inc.
  203 F.2d 109· 5th Cir.· 1953-04-02 ·cited 12×
  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.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Winona Textile Mills, Inc.
  160 F.2d 201· 8th Cir.· 1947-03-04 ·cited 12×
  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.
• 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. Vare
  206 F.2d 543· 3d Cir.· 1953-07-21 ·cited 11×
  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.
• 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×
• S. Moldings, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  715 F.2d 1069· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-23 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices and its issuance of a bargaining order were supported by substantial evidence and within its discretion.
• COIL-A.C.C., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  712 F.2d 1074· 6th Cir.· 1983-07-25 ·cited 10×
  The court enforced the NLRB's order, finding the employer committed unfair labor practices and that the broad injunctive relief and bargaining order were justified.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Babcock & Wilcox Co.
  697 F.2d 724· 6th Cir.· 1983-01-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that a principal union representative has an affirmative duty to inform union members that a strike is unlawful and opposed by the union, even without explicit contractual language.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sw. Bell Tel. Co.
  694 F.2d 974· 5th Cir.· 1982-11-26 ·cited 10×
  The court held that an employee's intemperate remarks during a dispute over overtime assignments were protected under the NLRA, and a subsequent suspension for provoked insubordination was unlawful.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 483 & Local 11, Int'l Ass'n of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Ironworkers, AFL-CIO
  672 F.2d 1159· 3d Cir.· 1982-02-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Board's order was not enforceable because the Board failed to make specific findings of fact and articulate its reasoning, particularly regarding the alleged discrimination and the appropriateness of extending remedies to 'similarly situated' individuals.
• Sw. Bell Tel. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  667 F.2d 470· 5th Cir.· 1982-02-08 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the employer did not violate an employee's Weingarten rights by limiting the union representative's participation in an investigatory interview, and that the Board was estopped by a prior settlement agreement from prosecuting a claim for refusal to provide doc
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sheraton Puerto RICO Corp.
  651 F.2d 49· 1st Cir.· 1981-06-11 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order for enforcement must be denied because the protest letter primarily concerned managerial disputes and lacked substantial evidence of impact on non-supervisory employees' working conditions.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. NEW York Typographical Union NO. 6
  632 F.2d 171· 2d Cir.· 1980-09-03 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the preference for category A employees in the hiring hall procedures does not violate the NLRA because it does not encourage union membership through discrimination, as the benefited class is closed to new members and serves a legitimate purpose of protecting
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Knuth Bros., Inc.
  584 F.2d 813· 7th Cir.· 1978-09-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the Company violated Section 8(a)(1) of the NLRA by denying accrued vacation benefits to striking employees based on its vacation policy, and that this violation alone justified the Board's order for payment.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local NO. 106, Glass Bottle Blowers Ass'n, AFL-CIO
  520 F.2d 693· 6th Cir.· 1975-07-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that maintaining labor union locals segregated by sex and processing grievances separately based on sex constitutes an unfair labor practice under the National Labor Relations Act.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Scenic Sportswear
  475 F.2d 1226· 6th Cir.· 1973-03-22 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the weight of evidence supported the Board's finding of an 8(a)(1) violation and that the Board's order was appropriate.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Commc'ns Workers OF Am., AFL-CIO
  474 F.2d 778· 2d Cir.· 1972-12-21 ·cited 10×
  Prior oral and written understandings, even if not in the formal agreement, can constitute a 'contract' under Section 8(d) for purposes of collective bargaining.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. KDI Precision Prods., Inc.
  436 F.2d 385· 6th Cir.· 1971-01-06 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the employees' petitions regarding working conditions and subsequent interrogations and discipline by the company constituted protected activity under the National Labor Relations Act.
• Laclede GAS Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  421 F.2d 610· 8th Cir.· 1970-02-04 ·cited 10×
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 1423
  238 F.2d 832· 5th Cir.· 1956-12-21 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the union's actions in threatening a strike and denying clearance based on its 'first in—first out' rule constituted restraint and coercion of employees and caused employer discrimination, violating the Act.
• Med. Ctr. AT Bowling Green v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  712 F.2d 1091· 6th Cir.· 1983-08-04 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board did not abuse its discretion in allowing unit directors to vote subject to challenge and in certifying the union, as the hospital failed to demonstrate substantial issues warranting a hearing or overturning the election.
• Hudgens v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  501 F.2d 161· 5th Cir.· 1974-09-25 ·cited 9×
  The court held that a shopping center owner violated the NLRA by threatening to arrest peaceful picketers at store entrances within the mall, as the picketing was sufficiently related to the shopping center's business and reasonable alternatives were unavailable.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Local 299
  782 F.2d 46· 6th Cir.· 1986-01-23 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Union's conduct did not breach its duty of fair representation because no individual or group was treated differently, and the Union did not violate Section 8(b)(1)(A) as it did not use restraint or coercion against employees.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Saint Vincent's Hosp.
  729 F.2d 730· 11th Cir.· 1984-04-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the hospital's overly broad 'no insignia' rule and solicitation of employee surveillance violated the Act, but that supervisor Vann's questioning of an employee was a valid security inquiry. The court also found substantial evidence supported the Board's findi
• Pattern Makers' League OF N. Am., AFL-CIO v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  724 F.2d 57· 7th Cir.· 1983-12-21 ·cited 8×
  A union constitution cannot prohibit members from resigning during a strike or when a strike is imminent, as this infringes upon the employees' Section 7 right to refrain from union activities.
• United Parcel Serv., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  706 F.2d 972· 3d Cir.· 1983-04-18 ·cited 8×
  The court should consider the statute of limitations defense because it was adequately raised before the Board, and the Board should determine if the alleged unfair labor practice occurred within the statutory period.
• Texaco, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  700 F.2d 1039· 5th Cir.· 1983-03-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the denial of sick benefits to striking employees was not inherently destructive of employee rights under Section 7 of the NLRA because the benefits were not accrued and served as a substitute for wages.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gaiu Local 13-B
  682 F.2d 304· 2d Cir.· 1982-06-11 ·cited 8×
  A union cannot discipline members for refusing to engage in unprotected activity, such as a concerted refusal to perform mandatory overtime, as this violates the National Labor Relations Act's policy of protecting employees' job security.