§

Comet Corporation

261 N.L.R.B. 1414 (N.L.R.B. 1982)
Comet Corporation

7 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,035 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  2. Machinists Local v. Labor Board

    362 U.S. 411 (1960)   Cited 276 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “a finding of violation which is inescapably grounded on events predating the limitations period” is untimely

  3. Labor Board v. Cabot Carbon Co.

    360 U.S. 203 (1959)   Cited 57 times
    Concluding that "dealing with" as used in 29 U.S.C. § 152 is a "broad term" and is not synonymous to "bargaining with"

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Cumberland Shoe Corporation

    351 F.2d 917 (6th Cir. 1965)   Cited 49 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Cumberland we emphasized that "In no instance did any employee testify that he was told that the election was the only purpose of the card."

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

    454 F.2d 520 (7th Cir. 1972)   Cited 20 times
    In Utrad, the court held that an isolated statement by a foreman made without the knowledge or acquiescence of higher management authority and threatening a plant closing upon a union victory did not violate section 8(a)(1).

  6. Southwest Regional Jt. Bd., v. N.L.R.B

    441 F.2d 1027 (D.C. Cir. 1970)   Cited 17 times
    Finding that the "proper question `is not whether an employee actually felt intimidated but whether the employer engaged in conduct which may reasonably be said to tend to interfere with the free exercise of employee rights under the Act'" (quoting Joy Silk Mills, supra, 185 F.2d at 743-44)

  7. Amalgamated Clothing Wkrs. v. N.L.R.B

    419 F.2d 1207 (D.C. Cir. 1969)   Cited 5 times

    Nos. 22088, 22568, 22569. Argued October 21, 1969. Decided November 13. 1969. Certiorari Denied March 23, 1970. See 90 S.Ct. 1120. Mr. Jacob Sheinkman, New York City, for petitioner in No. 22,088. Mr. Carmack Cochran, Nashville, Tenn., for petitioner in Nos. 22,568 and 22,569 and intervenor McEwen Mfg. Co. in No. 22,088. Mr. Seth D. Rosen, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, of the bar of the Supreme Court of Connecticut, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, for respondent. Messrs. Arnold