Clay City Beverages, Inc.
3 Cited authorities
Joy Silk Mills v. National Labor Rel. Board
185 F.2d 732 (D.C. Cir. 1950) Cited 162 times 2 Legal AnalysesIn Joy Silk the Court held that when an employer could have no doubt as to the majority status or when an employer refuses recognition of a union "due to a desire to gain time and to take action to dissipate the union's majority, the refusal is no longer justifiable and constitutes a violation of the duty to bargain set forth in section 8(a)(5) of the Act".
International Un., United A., A. v. N.L.R.B
363 F.2d 702 (D.C. Cir. 1966) Cited 34 timesRejecting argument NLRB used section 8(c) protected statements as "as some evidence of the unfair labor practices themselves" and concluding statements were used only to "place . . . other acts in context"
N.L.R.B. v. Great E. Color Lithographic Corp.
309 F.2d 352 (2d Cir. 1962) Cited 21 timesNo. 53, Docket 27470. Argued October 19, 1962. Decided November 1, 1962. A. Brummel, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallett-Prevost, Assistant General Counsel, and Melvin Pollack, Washington, D.C., on the brief) for petitioner. James E. Birdsall of Warner Birdsall, New York City, for respondent. Before WATERMAN, HAYS and MARSHALL, Circuit Judges. HAYS, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations