§

Akin Products Co.

99 N.L.R.B. 1270 (N.L.R.B. 1952)
Akin Products Co.

12 Cited authorities

  1. May Stores Co. v. Labor Board

    326 U.S. 376 (1945)   Cited 257 times
    Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"

  2. Republic Steel Corp. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 7 (1940)   Cited 232 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Republic Steel, supra, the Court refused to enforce an order requiring the employer to pay the full amount of back pay to an employee who had been paid to work for the Work Projects Administration in the meantime.

  3. Labor Board v. I. M. Electric Co.

    318 U.S. 9 (1943)   Cited 108 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Indiana Michigan Electric Co., 318 U.S. 9, at page 28, 63 S.Ct. 394, at page 405, 87 L.Ed. 579, the Supreme Court stated the general fundamental principles with respect to findings of fact by the Board, saying that the reviewing court is given discretion to see that before a party's rights are foreclosed his case has been fairly heard, and "Findings cannot be said to have been fairly reached unless material evidence which might impeach, as well as that which will support, its findings, is heard and weighed."

  4. Joanna Cotton Mills v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    176 F.2d 749 (4th Cir. 1949)   Cited 60 times
    Holding that circulation of a petition by an employee for the removal of a foreman against whom the employee held a personal grudge was not protected activity

  5. Union Starch Ref. v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

    186 F.2d 1008 (7th Cir. 1951)   Cited 51 times
    In Union Starch, the employees had tendered dues and an initiation fee but were denied membership in the union for refusal to file union application forms, attend a union meeting or take the union oath.

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Nabors

    196 F.2d 272 (5th Cir. 1952)   Cited 37 times

    No. 13526. April 29, 1952. Rehearing Denied June 6, 1952. Owsley Vose, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and David P. Findling, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, all of Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Martin Dies, Sr., Lufkin, Tex., for respondent. Before HOLMES, BORAH, and STRUM, Circuit Judges. STRUM, Circuit Judge. `This is a petition to enforce, and a cross petition to set aside, an order of the National Labor Relations Board, issued April 19, 1950, pursuant to Sec. 10(c) of the National Labor Relations

  7. Consumers Power Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    113 F.2d 38 (6th Cir. 1940)   Cited 56 times
    In Consumers Power Co. v. N.L.R.B., 6 Cir., 113 F.2d 38, 41, we considered and rejected the argument that no immediate and direct effect upon interstate commerce follows a labor controversy which curtails the employer's activity when its products are sold to an intervening private agency over whom the employer has no authority or control. It was said in Consolidated Edison Co. of New York v. N.L.R.B., 305 U.S. 197, 59 S.Ct. 206, 214, 83 L. Ed. 126, "it is the effect upon interstate or foreign commerce, not the source of the injury, which is the criterion."

  8. Kansas Milling Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    185 F.2d 413 (10th Cir. 1950)   Cited 36 times

    No. 4036. November 9, 1950. Rehearing Denied December 11, 1950. George Siefkin, Wichita, Kan. (Carl T. Smith, Wichita, Kan., on the brief), for petitioner. Bernard Dunau, Washington, D.C. (David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Assistant General Counsel, Washington D.C., and Leonard S. Kimmell, Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief), for respondent. Before BRATTON, HUXMAN and PICKETT, Circuit Judges. HUXMAN, Circuit Judge. This case is here on the petition of the Kansas Milling

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Greensboro Coca Cola Bottling Co.

    180 F.2d 840 (4th Cir. 1950)   Cited 35 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Greensboro Coca Cola Bottling Co., 4 Cir., 180 F.2d 840, 844, similar contentions were considered and determined.

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Vulcan Forging Co.

    188 F.2d 927 (6th Cir. 1951)   Cited 25 times
    In NLRB v. Vulcan Forging Co., 188 F.2d 927 (6th Cir. 1951), the court held that in determining whether the NLRB had jurisdiction over a company which sold all of its output to Ford Motor Company, judicial notice could be taken of the interstate activities of Ford.

  11. Section 160 - Prevention of unfair labor practices

    29 U.S.C. § 160   Cited 7,080 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the procedures for unfair labor practice cases mandated by R.C. 4117.12 and 4117.13 are substantively identical to those established in NLRA to govern unfair labor practice cases before NLRB