Section 8(A)(1) Interference, Restraint, Or Coercion

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

• 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. 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.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. The Englander Co., Inc.
  260 F.2d 67· 9th Cir.· 1958-10-10 ·cited 10×
  The court held that there was no substantial evidence to support the National Labor Relations Board's findings that Englander unlawfully assisted the Teamsters Union or discriminatorily denied employment to Robert McDonald.
• Brewery AND Beverage Drivers AND Workers v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  257 F.2d 194· D.C. Cir.· 1958-05-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's dismissal of the refusal-to-bargain charge was arbitrary and could not stand.
• S. Shore Hosp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  630 F.2d 40· 1st Cir.· 1980-09-18 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the Hospital violated the National Labor Relations Act by refusing to bargain in good faith and by discriminatorily withholding wage increases from unionized employees.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Builders Supply Co. OF Houston
  410 F.2d 606· 5th Cir.· 1969-05-05 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the employer violated the National Labor Relations Act by coercing employees during a union campaign and illegally discharging an employee for union activities, but modified the scope of the Board's order to be more specific.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. I. D. Lowe (Trustee for Barber J. Thomas
  406 F.2d 1033· 6th Cir.· 1969-01-21 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices, including interference, discrimination, and refusal to bargain, were supported by substantial evidence.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sea-Land Serv., Inc.
  356 F.2d 955· 1st Cir.· 1966-03-02 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's findings of unfair labor practices were supported by substantial evidence, and therefore, the Board's order was enforceable.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Kiekhaefer Corp.
  292 F.2d 130· 7th Cir.· 1961-06-29 ·cited 8×
  The Court held that while the employer engaged in unfair labor practices by supporting KIWA, the Board exceeded its authority by ordering the withdrawal of recognition from KIWA and abrogation of the collective bargaining agreement, as this undermined industrial stability and the
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Publishers Printing Co., Inc.
  625 F.2d 746· 6th Cir.· 1980-07-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the Board's findings that supervisors interrogated employees, threatened plant closure, and discriminatorily discharged employees for union activity, and that the company's no-solicitation rule was an unlawful restriction.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Marydale Prods. Co., Inc.
  311 F.2d 890· 5th Cir.· 1963-01-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board's order was supported by substantial evidence and should be enforced.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bel-Air Mart, Inc.
  497 F.2d 322· 4th Cir.· 1974-05-16 ·cited 4×
  The court held that discharging a guard for attending union meetings violates Sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) of the NLRA, as guards retain Section 7 rights as employees.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sellers
  346 F.2d 625· 9th Cir.· 1965-06-08 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the employer unlawfully assisted the union by creating the impression that only that union was acceptable, but found insufficient evidence for other alleged violations like management domination of the union or unlawful interrogation of applicants.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Feed & Supply Ctr., Inc.
  294 F.2d 650· 9th Cir.· 1961-09-05 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the respondent's failure to provide its health and welfare plan information and its overall conduct constituted a refusal to bargain in good faith, violating the National Labor Relations Act.
• Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen of N. Am., Afl-Cio v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  276 F.2d 34· 1st Cir.· 1960-03-22 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the National Labor Relations Board erred by failing to consider the impact of a contract amendment excluding supervisors from the union, which made their subsequent participation in union activities an unfair labor practice. The case is remanded for further co
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hicks-Ponder Co.
  458 F.2d 19· 5th Cir.· 1972-03-21 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the company violated Section 8(a)(1) by interfering with employee rights but did not violate Sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) by discriminatorily discharging two employees.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Coast Delivery Serv., Inc.
  437 F.2d 264· 9th Cir.· 1971-01-26 ·cited 2×
  The National Labor Relations Board's order finding that Coast Delivery Service, Inc. violated Sections 8(a)(3) and 8(a)(1) of the National Labor Relations Act by discharging or laying off employees due to union activities and by interrogating and threatening employees is enforced
• M & S Steel Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
  353 F.2d 80· 5th Cir.· 1965-11-16 ·cited 2×
  The court held that the company violated the National Labor Relations Act by prohibiting union literature distribution and interrogating an employee, and that the Board's order was valid.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fermont
  928 F.2d 609· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-21
  The court granted the NLRB's petition for enforcement, finding substantial evidence supported the NLRB's decisions that the employer unlawfully interfered with union activities and discriminatorily discharged employees.
• Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Plankinton Packing Co.
  265 F.2d 638· 7th Cir.· 1959-04-16
  The court held that the Board's bargaining unit determination was arbitrary and its findings of unfair labor practices were unsupported by substantial evidence.