§
Centac Corp.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,033 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  2. Machinists Local v. Labor Board

    362 U.S. 411 (1960)   Cited 276 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “a finding of violation which is inescapably grounded on events predating the limitations period” is untimely

  3. Garment Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 731 (1961)   Cited 213 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Food Employers Council, Inc.

    399 F.2d 501 (9th Cir. 1968)   Cited 24 times
    In NLRB v. Food Employers Council, Inc., 399 F.2d 501 (9th Cir. 1968), the Board, in denying accretion, found that snack bar employees in retail food markets had common interests separate and distinct from the other retail clerks in the market.

  5. Welch Scientific Company v. N.L.R.B

    340 F.2d 199 (2d Cir. 1965)   Cited 24 times
    In Welch Scientific Co. v. NLRB, 340 F.2d 199 (2 Cir. 1965), neither the Trial Examiner's report nor the Board's decision referred to the three-fold criteria, and the Board's brief in this court sought to justify the order as to interrogation only on the basis of lack of any proper purpose.

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Pembeck Oil Corp.

    404 F.2d 105 (2d Cir. 1968)   Cited 16 times
    In Pembeck, decided after Better Val-U Stores, Judge Hays again dissented, pointing out that neither Flomatic nor Val-U Stores had reached to § 8(a)(5) cases and urging that the "flagrant violation" standard not be extended to such cases.

  7. United Aircraft

    333 F.2d 819 (2d Cir. 1964)   Cited 13 times
    In United Aircraft v. NLRB, 333 F.2d 819 (1964), cert. den., 380 U.S. 910, 85 S.Ct. 893, 13 L.Ed.2d 796 (1965), the Second Circuit held that trainees had a sufficient community of interest for inclusion in the bargaining unit.

  8. Local 620, Allied Industrial Wkrs. v. N.L.R.B

    375 F.2d 707 (6th Cir. 1967)   Cited 10 times
    Finding that employer and union could not contractually extend boundaries of valid bargaining unit to new employees at new and distant plant

  9. N.L.R.B. v. L. 210, Int'l Bro. of Teamsters

    330 F.2d 46 (2d Cir. 1964)   Cited 7 times

    No. 352, Docket 28578. Argued March 13, 1964. Decided April 6, 1964. Jules H. Gordon, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Atty., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Charles R. Katz, New York City (Katz Wolchok, New York City, on the brief), for respondent. Before LUMBARD, Chief Judge, SMITH, Circuit Judge, and LEVET, District Judge. Sitting