Briggs Plumbingware, Inc.

21 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 "
John Wiley Sons v. Livingston
376 U.S. 543 (1964) Cited 1,771 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court should decide whether an arbitration agreement survived a corporate merger and bound the resulting corporation
Fall River Dyeing & Finishing Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
482 U.S. 27 (1987) Cited 369 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that the new employer must bargain with the old union, if the new employer is a true successor, and discussing factors
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Burns International Security Services, Inc.
406 U.S. 272 (1972) Cited 478 times 49 Legal Analyses
Holding that a successor is not bound to substantive terms of previous collective bargaining agreement
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fant Milling Co.
360 U.S. 301 (1959) Cited 106 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that an untimely allegation of an unlawful unilateral wage increase was sufficiently related to a timely refusal-to-bargain charge, because the wage increase "largely influenced" the Board's finding that an unlawful refusal to bargain had occurred
N.L.R.B. v. Tahoe Nugget, Inc.
584 F.2d 293 (9th Cir. 1978) Cited 58 times
In Tahoe Nugget and Sahara-Tahoe we stressed that the evidence presented to establish reasonable good faith doubt, individually or cumulatively, must unequivocally indicate that union support had declined to a minority.
Premium Foods, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
709 F.2d 623 (9th Cir. 1983) Cited 31 times
Holding that employees' requests for withdrawal cards, even if such requests indicated that the employees no longer wished to be members of the union, did “not necessarily indicate that [they] no longer wish to be represented by it”
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Jarm Enterprises, Inc.
785 F.2d 195 (7th Cir. 1986) Cited 24 times
Assessing business operations, plant, workforce, job positions, working conditions, supervisors, machinery, equipment, methods of production, and manufactured product or service to determine successor liability under NLRA
N.L.R.B. v. Hudson River Aggregates
639 F.2d 865 (2d Cir. 1981) Cited 26 times
Holding that the NLRB's bargaining unit determinations are rarely to be disturbed unless arbitrary, unreasonable, or not supported by substantial evidence.
N.L.R.B. v. Band-Age, Inc.
534 F.2d 1 (1st Cir. 1976) Cited 28 times
Holding that the diminution in an organization's size, and in the range of its products, does not preclude a finding of successorship

Briggs Plumbingware, Inc.

21 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 a court should decide whether an arbitration agreement survived a corporate merger and bound the resulting corporation

Holding that the new employer must bargain with the old union, if the new employer is a true successor, and discussing factors

Holding that a successor is not bound to substantive terms of previous collective bargaining agreement

Holding that an untimely allegation of an unlawful unilateral wage increase was sufficiently related to a timely refusal-to-bargain charge, because the wage increase "largely influenced" the Board's finding that an unlawful refusal to bargain had occurred

In Tahoe Nugget and Sahara-Tahoe we stressed that the evidence presented to establish reasonable good faith doubt, individually or cumulatively, must unequivocally indicate that union support had declined to a minority.

Holding that employees' requests for withdrawal cards, even if such requests indicated that the employees no longer wished to be members of the union, did “not necessarily indicate that [they] no longer wish to be represented by it”

Assessing business operations, plant, workforce, job positions, working conditions, supervisors, machinery, equipment, methods of production, and manufactured product or service to determine successor liability under NLRA

Holding that the NLRB's bargaining unit determinations are rarely to be disturbed unless arbitrary, unreasonable, or not supported by substantial evidence.

Holding that the diminution in an organization's size, and in the range of its products, does not preclude a finding of successorship