§

Inter-Mountain Dairymen, Inc.

157 N.L.R.B. 1590 (N.L.R.B. 1966)
Inter-Mountain Dairymen, Inc.

15 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 709 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

  2. Labor Board v. Insurance Agents

    361 U.S. 477 (1960)   Cited 324 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, subject to the duty to bargain in good faith, "parties should have wide latitude in their negotiations"

  3. Labor Board v. American Ins. Co.

    343 U.S. 395 (1952)   Cited 269 times
    Holding the degree of discretion in a CBA "is an issue for determination across the bargaining table, not by the Board"

  4. Labor Board v. Crompton Mills

    337 U.S. 217 (1949)   Cited 102 times
    Holding unlawful unilateral changes significantly different from "any which the employer has proposed" during bargaining

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Reed Prince MFG

    205 F.2d 131 (1st Cir. 1953)   Cited 118 times
    In Reed Prince, supra, this court affirmed the Board's finding of refusal to bargain in good faith only "[a]fter an attentive review of the entire record of the bargaining negotiations."

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Herman Sausage Co

    275 F.2d 229 (5th Cir. 1960)   Cited 79 times
    In NLRB v. Herman Sausage Co., 275 F.2d 229 (5th Cir. 1960), our circuit held that "generally speaking, the freedom to grant a unilateral wage increase "is limited to cases where there has been a bona fide but unsuccessful attempt to reach an agreement with the union, or where the union bears the guilt for having broken off relations.' NLRB v. Andrew Jergens Co., 9 Cir., 1949, 175 F.2d 130, 136, cert. denied, 338 U.S. 827, 70 S.Ct. 76, 94 L.Ed. 503.

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Whittier Mills Co.

    111 F.2d 474 (5th Cir. 1940)   Cited 67 times
    Interpreting Virginian Railway's holding as “[w]here with fair opportunity to all members of the unit to vote, a majority do vote, they are, so to speak, a quorum to settle the matter, and the majority of that quorum binds those not voting, and suffices to select the bargaining representative of the unit”

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Phaostron Instrument Elec. Co.

    344 F.2d 855 (9th Cir. 1965)   Cited 17 times

    No. 19505. April 27, 1965. Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Warren M. Davison, Michael R. Brown, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Erwin Lerten, Potruch Lerten, Beverly Hills, Cal., for respondent. Before DUNIWAY and ELY, Circuit Judges, and SOLOMON, District Judge. ELY, Circuit Judge: The National Labor Relations Board seeks full enforcement of its Order (146 N.L.R.B. No. 124), issued after a hearing and

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Natl. Shoes

    208 F.2d 688 (2d Cir. 1953)   Cited 29 times
    Deciding that the employerengaged in an unfair labor practice in violation of § 8 where the record contained evidence of “[l]ong delays unaccounted for in the matter of correspondence and the preparation of documents, the postponement of meetings of the negotiators for weeks at a time, and the reopening of questions previously settled”

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Universal Camera

    179 F.2d 749 (2d Cir. 1950)   Cited 24 times

    No. 54, Docket 21395. Argued December 6, 1949. Decided January 10, 1950. A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Ruth Weyand, Asst. Gen. Counsel, William J. Avrutis, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Kaye, Scholer, Fierman Hays, New York City, Frederick R. Livingston, New York City, for respondent. On petition of the National Labor Relations Board for an order, "enforcing" an order of the Board to "cease