Labor Board v. Borg-Warner Corp.

Holding employer's insistence on a ballot clause was an unfair labor practice under § 8 because it was a non-mandatory subject of bargaining and it "substantially modifies the collective-bargaining system provided for in the statute by weakening the independence of the 'representative' chosen by the employees. It enables the employer, in effect, to deal with its employees rather than with their statutory representative."

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. C & C Plywood Corp.

Holding that the NLRB has the authority to interpret CBAs in the first instance where its interpretation is for the purpose of “enforc[ing] a statutory right which Congress considered necessary to allow labor and management to get on with the process of reaching fair terms and conditions of employment”

H.J. Heinz Co. v. Labor Board

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.

Douds v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n

In Douds v. International Longshoremen's Association, 241 F.2d 278 (2d Cir. 1957), we upheld the district court's granting of a preliminary injunction sought by the Board against a union.

Newspaper Printing Corp. v. N.L.R.B

Stating that "it is the Board's duty to make the final determination as to whether an unfair labor practice has occurred" and that "insistence to impasse upon a non-mandatory subject of bargaining violates § 8"

N.L.R.B. v. Columbia Tribune Publishing Co.

In N.L.R.B. v. Columbia Tribune Publishing Co., 495 F.2d 1384 (8th Cir. 1974), the newspaper had changed from hot metal to cold photo composition.

Newspaper Printing Corp. v. N.L.R.B

In Newspaper Printing, the employer did not merely reserve the right to assign work to another union, but also reserved the right unilaterally to determine what jobs were in the bargaining unit.

Newport News Shipbuilding v. N.L.R.B

Holding that employer's proposal to change bargaining unit definition from "designers" to "draftsmen" would not merely affect work assignments but would alter the scope of the bargaining unit, because it would "not only modify the job functions of the various unit members but also affect their right to representation"

National Fresh Fruit Vegetable v. N.L.R.B

Hess Oil Chemical Corporation v. N.L.R.B

Holding "an issue concerning the construction of an appropriate unit so as to exclude certain members from that unit is not a subject for bargaining and an insistence upon it constitutes a violation" of the NLRA