§

Container Corp. of America

61 N.L.R.B. 823 (N.L.R.B. 1945)
Container Corp. of America

6 Cited authorities

  1. J.I. Case Co. v. Labor Board

    321 U.S. 332 (1944)   Cited 457 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the result of a collective bargaining agreement is not "a contract of employment except in rare cases; no one has a job by reason of it and no obligation to any individual ordinarily comes into existence from it alone"

  2. Nat. Licorice Co. v. Labor Bd.

    309 U.S. 350 (1940)   Cited 315 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that requiring employees to sign individual contracts waiving their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining violates § 8 of the NLRA

  3. H.J. Heinz Co. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 514 (1941)   Cited 241 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In H.J. Heinz Co. v. N.L.R.B., 311 U.S. 514, 61 S.Ct. 320, 85 L.Ed. 309 and Cox v. Gatliff Coal Co., D.C., 59 F. Supp. 882, affirmed 6 Cir., 152 F.2d 52, it was stated that the Act contemplated that a collective bargaining agreement be in writing.

  4. Labor Board v. Sands Mfg. Co.

    306 U.S. 332 (1939)   Cited 139 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Sands Mfg. Co., 306 U.S. 332, 59 S.Ct. 508, 83 L.Ed. 682, affirming the ruling of this Court in 6 Cir., 96 F.2d 721, the Supreme Court held the employer justified in abandoning further negotiations with the Union when conditions showed the uselessness of continuing with them.

  5. Triboro Coach Corp. v. Labor Relations Board

    286 N.Y. 314 (N.Y. 1941)   Cited 29 times

    Argued June 10, 1941 Decided July 29, 1941 Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department, FROESSEL, J. John J. Bennett, Jr., Attorney-General ( Henry Epstein of counsel), Daniel Kornblum, Eugene Cotton and Harold Dublirer for appellants. Samuel Seabury and George Trosk for Triboro Coach Corporation, respondent. Charlton Ogburn for Amalgamated Association of Street, Electric Railway and Motor Coach Employees of America, respondent. FINCH, J. The facts in this case have been

  6. Matter of Coldren v. Mathieson Alkali Works, Inc.

    245 App. Div. 875 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)

    September, 1935. Appeal from State Industrial Board. Present — Hill, P.J., Rhodes, Crapser, Bliss and Heffernan, JJ. Claimant was employed as a filler in the chlorine department of his employer. On May 3, 1925, while engaged in his regular occupation, claimant suffered a strain of the right and left inguinal regions and as a result developed a complete right inguinal hernia and a partial left inguinal hernia. A double herniotomy was performed. About June 22, 1929, claimant suffered recurrent hernias