Armored Transfer Service Inc.

22 Cited authorities

Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,674 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "
Mine Workers v. Pennington
381 U.S. 657 (1965) Cited 1,640 times 21 Legal Analyses
Holding that immunity extends to petitioning conduct “either standing alone or as part of a broader scheme”
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Great Dane Trailers, Inc.
388 U.S. 26 (1967) Cited 322 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding of discriminatory conduct as the Company failed to meet its burden of establishing legitimate motives for its conduct
Labor Board v. Erie Resistor Corp.
373 U.S. 221 (1963) Cited 358 times 1 Legal Analyses
Upholding Board decision prohibiting employer from granting super-seniority to strike-breakers because "[s]uper-seniority renders future bargaining difficult, if not impossible"
Mastro Plastics Corp. v. Labor Board
350 U.S. 270 (1956) Cited 403 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that collective-bargaining agreement "must be read as a whole and in light of the law relating to it when it was made"
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fleetwood Trailer Co.
389 U.S. 375 (1967) Cited 233 times
In Fleetwood Trailer, 389 U.S. 375, 88 S.Ct. 543, the Supreme Court was required to determine whether the employer violated the Act when it hired six new employees who had not previously worked for the company instead of six former strikers who had applied for reinstatement.
Labor Board v. Mackay Co.
304 U.S. 333 (1938) Cited 535 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices
SCM Corp. v. Advance Business Systems & Supply Co.
397 U.S. 920 (1970) Cited 200 times 5 Legal Analyses
Upholding a delay of three months where only prejudice shown was that the defendants could not recall details of the days in the distant past; no special circumstances
Labor Bd. v. Washington Aluminum Co.
370 U.S. 9 (1962) Cited 206 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections
Allen Bradley Co. v. Union
325 U.S. 797 (1945) Cited 304 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the defendants were not protected by the statutory labor exemption because the union had combined with contractors and manufacturers in order to boycott the plaintiffs' business
Section 158 - Unfair labor practices
29 U.S.C. § 158 Cited 10,316 times 84 Legal Analyses
Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355
Section 157 - Right of employees as to organization, collective bargaining, etc.
29 U.S.C. § 157 Cited 3,300 times 97 Legal Analyses
Granting employees the right to engage in or refrain from engaging in union activity
Section 152 - Definitions
29 U.S.C. § 152 Cited 3,211 times 27 Legal Analyses
Defining a supervisor to include “any individual having authority . . . to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibly to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judgment”
Section 6621 - Determination of rate of interest
26 U.S.C. § 6621 Cited 1,873 times 23 Legal Analyses
Applying a higher interest rate to past liabilities resulting from tax-motivated transactions

Armored Transfer Service Inc.

22 Cited authorities

Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

Holding that immunity extends to petitioning conduct “either standing alone or as part of a broader scheme”

Holding that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding of discriminatory conduct as the Company failed to meet its burden of establishing legitimate motives for its conduct

Upholding Board decision prohibiting employer from granting super-seniority to strike-breakers because "[s]uper-seniority renders future bargaining difficult, if not impossible"

Holding that collective-bargaining agreement "must be read as a whole and in light of the law relating to it when it was made"

In Fleetwood Trailer, 389 U.S. 375, 88 S.Ct. 543, the Supreme Court was required to determine whether the employer violated the Act when it hired six new employees who had not previously worked for the company instead of six former strikers who had applied for reinstatement.

Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices

Upholding a delay of three months where only prejudice shown was that the defendants could not recall details of the days in the distant past; no special circumstances

Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections

Holding that the defendants were not protected by the statutory labor exemption because the union had combined with contractors and manufacturers in order to boycott the plaintiffs' business

Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355

Granting employees the right to engage in or refrain from engaging in union activity

Applying a higher interest rate to past liabilities resulting from tax-motivated transactions