§

Building and Construction Trades Council, Etc.

155 N.L.R.B. 319 (N.L.R.B. 1965)
Building and Construction Trades Council, Etc.

11 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Denver Bldg. Council

    341 U.S. 675 (1951)   Cited 494 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Board's assertion of jurisdiction over activities taking place at local construction site based on finding that "any widespread application of the practices charged might well result in substantially decreasing" the flow of interstate commerce

  2. Electrical Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 667 (1961)   Cited 186 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union may picket a secondary employer only when the primary employer is at the job site

  3. Electrical Workers v. Labor Board

    341 U.S. 694 (1951)   Cited 246 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the prohibition of picketing in furtherance of unlawful objectives is not an abridgement of free speech

  4. Labor Board v. Rice Milling Co.

    341 U.S. 665 (1951)   Cited 126 times
    Noting that section 8(b) was intended to preserve "the right of labor organizations to bring pressure to bear on offending employers in primary labor disputes"

  5. Steelworkers v. Labor Board

    376 U.S. 492 (1964)   Cited 75 times
    Stating that section 8(b) prohibits labor unions from engaging in "secondary boycotting" by "exert[ing] pressure on an employer not involved in the relevant labor dispute ('the secondary employer') in order to obtain a favorable result in the ongoing labor dispute with another employer ('the primary employer')"

  6. Carpenters Union v. Labor Board

    341 U.S. 707 (1951)   Cited 89 times
    In Carpenters Union v. Labor Board, 341 U.S. 707, 71 S.Ct. 966, 971, supra, the Supreme Court said: "The use of such pressure on this renovation project was merely a sample of what might be repeated elsewhere if not prohibited. The underlying dispute between petitioners and Watson's has not been shown to have been resolved."

  7. Seafarers International Un., Etc. v. N.L.R.B

    265 F.2d 585 (D.C. Cir. 1959)   Cited 46 times

    No. 14373. Argued November 4, 1958. Decided January 29, 1959. Mr. C. Paul Barker, New Orleans, La., of the bar of the Supreme Court of Louisiana, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Messrs. Ray R. Murdock, Washington, D.C., and Seymour W. Miller, Brooklyn, N.Y., were on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Norton J. Come, Deputy Asst. Gen. Counsel, with whom Mr. Jerome D. Fenton, Gen. Counsel, Mr. Thomas J. McDermott, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, and Mr. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel

  8. Retail Fruit Veg. Clerks U. v. N.L.R.B

    249 F.2d 591 (9th Cir. 1957)   Cited 39 times

    No. 15298. November 8, 1957. Carroll, Davis, Burdick, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner. Jerome D. Fenton, Gen. Counsel, Stephen Leonard, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Duane Beeson, Norton J. Come, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before DENMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and BONE and FEE, Circuit Judges. BONE, Circuit Judge. Petitioners bring the instant proceeding to this Court for review and seek an order setting aside an order of the National

  9. National Labor Relations Bd. v. L. Un. No. 55

    218 F.2d 226 (10th Cir. 1954)   Cited 29 times
    Recognizing amendments made closed-shop agreements illegal

  10. Di Giorgio Fruit Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    191 F.2d 642 (D.C. Cir. 1951)   Cited 27 times
    In Di Giorgio Fruit Corp. v. NLRB, 89 U.S.App.D.C. 155, 191 F.2d 642, 28 A.L.R.2d 377, cert. denied, 342 U.S. 869, 72 S.Ct. 110, 96 L.Ed. 653 (1951), we held that the word "employees," as used in section 2(5) to define "labor organization," was not itself to be defined in its generic sense. It was to be given only the meaning attributed to it by section 2(3) when the question before the court was whether a given organization was subject to the restrictions of the secondary boycott provision.