§
C-Line Express

21 Cited authorities

  1. Mastro Plastics Corp. v. Labor Board

    350 U.S. 270 (1956)   Cited 403 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that collective-bargaining agreement "must be read as a whole and in light of the law relating to it when it was made"

  2. SCM Corp. v. Advance Business Systems & Supply Co.

    397 U.S. 920 (1970)   Cited 200 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Upholding a delay of three months where only prejudice shown was that the defendants could not recall details of the days in the distant past; no special circumstances

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. International Van Lines

    409 U.S. 48 (1972)   Cited 71 times
    Holding that a statement that striking employees "are being permanently replaced" constituted an unlawful discharge when permanent replacements had not been hired

  4. Soule Glass and Glazing Co. v. N.L.R.B

    652 F.2d 1055 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 97 times
    Holding that the employer "must bargain with respect to the decision to remove work from bargaining unit employees, not merely its effects on the employees"

  5. Laidlaw Corporation v. N.L.R.B

    414 F.2d 99 (7th Cir. 1969)   Cited 81 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that while an employer is not obligated to discharge permanent replacements to make room for returning economic strikers, the employer must place the former strikers on a preferential recall list

  6. Vulcan Hart Corp.

    718 F.2d 269 (8th Cir. 1983)   Cited 44 times
    Holding “Rule 408 excludes evidence of settlement offers only if such evidence is offered to prove liability for or invalidity of the claim under negotiation”

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Pacific Grinding Wheel Co., Inc.

    572 F.2d 1343 (9th Cir. 1978)   Cited 45 times
    In Pacific Grinding Wheel, the court recognized that "Board disapproval of proposed terms," "a company's adamant insistence on strong pro-management terms," and "rejection by the employer of terms which were in a previous contract" are not sufficient in themselves to establish bad faith, but are factors which may be considered by the Board with other evidence, and that the "totality of the circumstances may justify a finding of failure to bargain in good faith."

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Windham Community Memorial Hosp

    577 F.2d 805 (2d Cir. 1978)   Cited 26 times
    Approving Board presumption

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Randle-Eastern Ambulance Service

    584 F.2d 720 (5th Cir. 1978)   Cited 25 times
    In Randle-Eastern, our predecessor circuit considered the presumption that new employees support the Union in the same ratio as those they have replaced, and rejected its application where the employee "turnover" results from the replacement of strikers.

  10. Philip Carey Mfg., v. N.L.R.B

    331 F.2d 720 (6th Cir. 1964)   Cited 42 times

    Nos. 15289, 15330. March 31, 1964. J. Mack Swigert, Cincinnati, Ohio, Frank H. Stewart, Cincinnati, Ohio, on brief; E.J. Fasold, Cincinnati, Ohio, of counsel, for Philip Carey Mfg. Co. Lowell Goerlich, Washington, D.C., for International Union, etc. William J. Avrutis, Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, Allison W. Brown, Jr., Attorney, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief, for N.L.R.B. Before