ยง

United Association of Journeymen & Apprentices, Etc.

115 N.L.R.B. 594 (N.L.R.B. 1956)
United Association of Journeymen & Apprentices, Etc.

12 Cited authorities

  1. Edison Co. v. Labor Board

    305 U.S. 197 (1938)   Cited 19,212 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a Board order cannot be grounded in hearsay

  2. Radio Officers v. Labor Board

    347 U.S. 17 (1954)   Cited 470 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he policy of the Act is to insulate employees' jobs from their organizational rights"

  3. Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.

    312 U.S. 426 (1941)   Cited 505 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"

  4. Virginia Electric Co. v. Board

    319 U.S. 533 (1943)   Cited 325 times
    Stating that the purpose of the Act is to encourage and protect "full freedom of association for workers"

  5. Nat. Licorice Co. v. Labor Bd.

    309 U.S. 350 (1940)   Cited 314 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that requiring employees to sign individual contracts waiving their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining violates ยง 8 of the NLRA

  6. National Labor Rel. Board v. Baltimore T. Co.

    140 F.2d 51 (4th Cir. 1944)   Cited 57 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Baltimore T. Co., 4 Cir., 140 F.2d 51, the court alluded with apparent approval to the fact that the Board had endeavored to avoid making its sanctions operate retroactively.

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Philadelphia Iron Works, Inc.

    211 F.2d 937 (3d Cir. 1954)   Cited 25 times
    Noting that hiring practices after a grievance was filed "would be a factor for the board's consideration" but that the NLRB easily could reason that subsequent hiring practices were reactionary to the grievance and did not accurately reflect the prior hiring arrangement

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gottfried Baking

    210 F.2d 772 (2d Cir. 1954)   Cited 24 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Gottfried Baking Co., 210 F.2d 772 (2 Cir., 1954), this court considered and rejected the same argument on nearly identical facts: "We think it is unimportant whether or not the Association existed as a formal entity, so long as it is clear that [the employer] acted jointly with other employers in the Association in the negotiation of collective agreements, as the impact upon interstate commerce would be the same in either case."

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. George D. Auchter

    209 F.2d 273 (5th Cir. 1954)   Cited 21 times

    No. 14537. January 15, 1954. A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elizabeth W. Weston, Atty., David P. Findling, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, George J. Bott, General Counsel, Dean E. Denlinger, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Edwin C. Coffee, Harry G. Kincaid, Jacksonville, Fla., Knight, Walrath, Kincaid Young, Jacksonville, Fla., Coffee Coffee, Jacksonville, Fla., for respondent Carpenters Dist. Council of Jacksonville and Vicinity. Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Lummus Co.

    210 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1954)   Cited 20 times

    No. 14520. February 12, 1954. George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Elmer Davis, Chief Law Officer, N.L.R.B., Fort Worth, Tex., Frederick U. Reel, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Dean E. Denlinger, Atty., N.L.R.B., Dayton, Ohio, for petitioner. Quentin Keith, Cecil, Keith Mehaffy, Beaumont, Tex., for respondent. Before HUTCHESON, Chief Judge, and BORAH and RIVES, Circuit Judges. BORAH, Circuit