A/Z Electric, Inc.

9 Cited authorities

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.”
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
Dreis Krump Mfg. Co., Inc. v. N.L.R.B
544 F.2d 320 (7th Cir. 1976) Cited 48 times 1 Legal Analyses
Upholding Board's refusal to defer on ground that award would violate employee's § 7 rights.
Hotel Emp. Restaurant Emp. Un. v. N.L.R.B
760 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1985) Cited 26 times 6 Legal Analyses
Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176
N.L.R.B. v. Styletek, Div. of Pandel-Bradford
520 F.2d 275 (1st Cir. 1975) Cited 29 times
No. 75-1017. Argued June 3, 1975. Decided August 6, 1975. Margery E. Lieber, Atty., with whom Peter G. Nash, Gen. Counsel, John S. Irving, Deputy Gen. Counsel, Patrick Hardin, Associate Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, and John H. Ferguson, Atty., were on brief, for petitioner. George H. Foley, Boston, Mass., with whom Hale Dorr, Boston, Mass., was on brief, for respondent. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before COFFIN, Chief Judge, McENTEE
N.L.R.B. v. Montgomery Ward Co., Inc.
554 F.2d 996 (10th Cir. 1977) Cited 24 times
Permitting inference
N.L.R.B. v. Sonoma Vineyards, Inc.
727 F.2d 860 (9th Cir. 1984) Cited 6 times
No. 83-7025. Argued and Submitted December 13, 1983. Decided March 6, 1984. John Burgoyne, Asst. U.S. Atty., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Wesley J. Fastiff, David Durham, Littler, Mendelson, Fastiff Tichy, San Francisco, Cal., for respondent. On Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Before WALLACE, BOOCHEVER, Circuit Judges, and WYZANSKI, Senior District Judge. Honorable Charles E. Wyzanski, Jr., Senior United States District Judge for the District of
N.L.R.B. v. Tennessee Plastics, Inc.
525 F.2d 670 (6th Cir. 1975) Cited 1 times
No. 73-1445. November 3, 1975. Elliot Moore, Peter Nash, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., David Miller, John Irving, Walter C. Phillips, Director, Reg. 10, N.L.R.B., Atlanta, Ga., John D. Burgoyne, Patrick Hardin, Julius Rosenbaum, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Anthony J. Leggio, Mitchell, Pate Anderson, James W. Wimberly, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., for respondent. R. Jeffrey Bixler, Mulholland, Hickey Lyman, Toledo, Ohio, for intervenor. Before EDWARDS, CELEBREZZE and LIVELY, Circuit
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Osbrink
218 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1955) Cited 6 times
In NLRB v. Osbrink, 218 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1954), cert. denied, 349 U.S. 928, 75 S.Ct. 770, 99 L.Ed. 1259 (1955), this court was faced with a similar argument.

A/Z Electric, Inc.

9 Cited authorities

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.”

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

Upholding Board's refusal to defer on ground that award would violate employee's § 7 rights.

Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176

Permitting inference

In NLRB v. Osbrink, 218 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1954), cert. denied, 349 U.S. 928, 75 S.Ct. 770, 99 L.Ed. 1259 (1955), this court was faced with a similar argument.