§

Business Services By Manpower, Inc

272 N.L.R.B. 827 (N.L.R.B. 1984)
Business Services By Manpower, Inc

20 Cited authorities

  1. Sears, Roebuck Co. v. Carpenters

    436 U.S. 180 (1978)   Cited 554 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that both state and federal courts must defer to the National Labor Relations Board when an activity is arguably protected under § 7 or prohibited by § 8 of the NLRA

  2. Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor Board

    313 U.S. 177 (1941)   Cited 871 times
    Holding that the NLRA limits the Board's backpay authority to restoring “actual losses”

  3. Eastex, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    437 U.S. 556 (1978)   Cited 196 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a newsletter that "urg[ed] employees to write their legislators to oppose incorporation of the state 'right-to-work' statute into a revised state constitution," "criticiz[ed] a Presidential veto of an increase in the federal minimum wage and urg[ed] employees to register to vote" was protected concerted activity

  4. Republic Aviation Corp. v. Board

    324 U.S. 793 (1945)   Cited 495 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."

  5. Labor Board v. Rockaway News Co.

    345 U.S. 71 (1953)   Cited 128 times
    Holding that employees may bargain away their statutory right to strike

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Southern California Edison Co.

    646 F.2d 1352 (9th Cir. 1981)   Cited 35 times
    Suggesting the facts "support an inference that the union waived the right to engage in sympathy strikes" but finding that inference "insufficient ... to overcome the deference due the Board's interpretation" to the contrary

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Gould, Inc.

    638 F.2d 159 (10th Cir. 1980)   Cited 14 times
    Applying the coterminous interpretation doctrine to an express no-strike clause after finding that there was no extrinsic evidence to indicate that the parties intended to the contrary

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Whitfield Pickle Company

    374 F.2d 576 (5th Cir. 1967)   Cited 29 times

    No. 22949. March 24, 1967. Rehearing Denied April 18, 1967. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Frank H. Itkin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Atty., N.L.R.B., for petitioner. Fred S. Ball, Montgomery, Ala., for respondent. Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and THORNBERRY and GOLDBERG, Circuit Judges. GOLDBERG, Circuit Judge: The National Labor Relations Board here petitions for enforcement of its order directed

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co.

    130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942)   Cited 69 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In NLRB v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co., 130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942), Judge Learned Hand stated his view of the type of activity protected by section 7.

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Southern Greyhound Lines

    426 F.2d 1299 (5th Cir. 1970)   Cited 24 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 27429. April 20, 1970. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Harold A. Boire, Director, Region 12, N.L.R.B., Tampa, Fla., for petitioner. Robert F. Houlihan, Lexington, Ky., for respondent. Before GOLDBERG, DYER and CARSWELL, Circuit Judges. GOLDBERG, Circuit Judge: The National Labor Relations Board here seeks enforcement of an order issued against Southern Greyhound Lines, Inc. Our basic problem revolves around the discharge of a conscientious

  11. Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy

    29 U.S.C. § 151   Cited 5,092 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"

  12. Section 152 - Definitions

    29 U.S.C. § 152   Cited 3,213 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”