Nissan Research And Development, Inc.

21 Cited authorities

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"
Labor Board v. Parts Co.
375 U.S. 405 (1964) Cited 213 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”
N.L.R.B. v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc.
341 F.2d 750 (6th Cir. 1965) Cited 62 times
In N.L.R.B. v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 341 F.2d 750 (6 Cir. 1965), the court granted enforcement of the Board's order finding the requests for copies of statements to be a violation of Section 8(a)(1).
N.L.R.B. v. Anchorage Times Pub. Co.
637 F.2d 1359 (9th Cir. 1981) Cited 29 times
No. 79-7024. Argued and Submitted May 8, 1980. Decided February 27, 1981. Rehearing Denied April 29, 1981. Ruah Donnelly Lahey. Washington, D.C., argued, for petitioner; Elliott Moore, NLRB, Washington, D.C., on brief. Douglas A. Riggs, Anchorage, Alaska, argued, for respondent; Karl Johnstown, Anchorage, Alaska, on brief. On Petition to Review and Cross-application to Enforce a Decision of the National Labor Relations Board. Before ANDERSON and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges, and BYRNE, District Judge.
N.L.R.B. v. Cumberland Shoe Corporation
351 F.2d 917 (6th Cir. 1965) Cited 49 times 2 Legal Analyses
In Cumberland we emphasized that "In no instance did any employee testify that he was told that the election was the only purpose of the card."
Irving Air Chute Company v. N.L.R.B
350 F.2d 176 (2d Cir. 1965) Cited 49 times
In Irving Air Chute Co. v. N.L.R.B., 2 Cir., 350 F.2d 176, 182, the Court in allowing enforcement of the Board's order cited many cases for the proposition, "`It is for the Board not the courts to determine how the effect of prior unfair labor practices may be expunged'."
N.L.R.B. v. Horizon Air Services, Inc.
761 F.2d 22 (1st Cir. 1985) Cited 18 times
Affirming bargaining order because the egregious actions of the employer "constitute a more than ample basis for a sound inference of future interference and/or enduring aftereffects"
International Un., United A., A. v. N.L.R.B
363 F.2d 702 (D.C. Cir. 1966) Cited 34 times
Rejecting argument NLRB used section 8(c) protected statements as "as some evidence of the unfair labor practices themselves" and concluding statements were used only to "place . . . other acts in context"
N.L.R.B. v. Windsor Industries, Inc.
730 F.2d 860 (2d Cir. 1984) Cited 13 times
No. 355, Docket 83-4135. Argued December 15, 1983. Decided March 13, 1984. Joseph F. Frankl, Washington, D.C. (William A. Lubbers, Gen. Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel, Robert E. Allen, Associate Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, and Peter Winkler, Atty., Washington, D.C.) for petitioner. Clifford P. Chaiet, Jericho, N.Y. (Pearl Chaiet, P.C., Jericho, N.Y.), for respondent. Petition from the National Labor Relations Board. Before FEINBERG, Chief Judge
Ona Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
729 F.2d 713 (11th Cir. 1984) Cited 11 times
No. 82-7308. April 9, 1984. John J. Coleman, Jr., Braxton Schell, Jr., William Michael Warren, Birmingham, Ala., for Ona Corporation. James D. Fagan, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., for UAW. Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, Div. of Enforcement Litigation, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Elaine Patrick, Washington, D.C., for N.L.R.B. Petitions for Review of an Order of The National Labor Relations Board. Before TJOFLAT and FAY, Circuit Judges, and WISDOM, Senior Circuit Judge. Honorable John Minor Wisdom

Nissan Research And Development, Inc.

21 Cited authorities

Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”

In N.L.R.B. v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 341 F.2d 750 (6 Cir. 1965), the court granted enforcement of the Board's order finding the requests for copies of statements to be a violation of Section 8(a)(1).

In Cumberland we emphasized that "In no instance did any employee testify that he was told that the election was the only purpose of the card."

In Irving Air Chute Co. v. N.L.R.B., 2 Cir., 350 F.2d 176, 182, the Court in allowing enforcement of the Board's order cited many cases for the proposition, "`It is for the Board not the courts to determine how the effect of prior unfair labor practices may be expunged'."

Affirming bargaining order because the egregious actions of the employer "constitute a more than ample basis for a sound inference of future interference and/or enduring aftereffects"

Rejecting argument NLRB used section 8(c) protected statements as "as some evidence of the unfair labor practices themselves" and concluding statements were used only to "place . . . other acts in context"