§

Croft Metals, Inc.

272 N.L.R.B. 208 (N.L.R.B. 1985)
Croft Metals, Inc.

4 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Borg-Warner Corp.

    356 U.S. 342 (1958)   Cited 296 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding employer's insistence on a ballot clause was an unfair labor practice under § 8 because it was a non-mandatory subject of bargaining and it "substantially modifies the collective-bargaining system provided for in the statute by weakening the independence of the 'representative' chosen by the employees. It enables the employer, in effect, to deal with its employees rather than with their statutory representative."

  2. N.L.R.B. v. Bancroft Manufacturing Co. Inc

    516 F.2d 436 (5th Cir. 1975)   Cited 23 times
    Holding that if propaganda is "racially inflammatory," then "the test for truth and relevancy must be made as Sewell describes;" if the propaganda is not inflammatory, then "the statements should be reviewed under the familiar standards applied to any other type of alleged material misrepresentation"

  3. N.L.R.B. v. Bancroft Mfg. Co., Inc.

    635 F.2d 492 (5th Cir. 1981)   Cited 6 times
    Concluding that employer's mere refusal to yield did not constitute bad faith

  4. Kit Manufacturing Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    365 F.2d 829 (9th Cir. 1966)   Cited 2 times

    No. 20604. August 10, 1966. Weston Weston, Eli Weston, Boise, Idaho, for petitioner. Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Paul Elkind, Leonard M. Wagman, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before CHAMBERS, MERRILL and DUNIWAY, Circuit Judges. OPINION AND ORDER PER CURIAM: Petitioner's petition for review is denied for the reason that this court is of the opinion that the labor board's determination that petitioner