§

Dal-Tex Optical Co., Inc.

130 N.L.R.B. 1313 (N.L.R.B. 1961)
Dal-Tex Optical Co., Inc.

10 Cited authorities

  1. I.A. of M. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 72 (1940)   Cited 318 times
    In International Ass'n of Machinists v. N.L.R.B., 1940, 311 U.S. 72, 61 S.Ct. 83, 85 L. Ed. 50, there had been a long history of management favoritism to the established and hostility to the aspiring union; and in Franks Bros. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 1944, 321 U.S. 702, 703, 64 S.Ct. 817, 818, 88 L.Ed. 1020, the employer had "conducted an aggressive campaign against the Union, even to the extent of threatening to close its factory if the union won the election."

  2. May Stores Co. v. Labor Board

    326 U.S. 376 (1945)   Cited 257 times
    Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fant Milling Co.

    360 U.S. 301 (1959)   Cited 106 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an untimely allegation of an unlawful unilateral wage increase was sufficiently related to a timely refusal-to-bargain charge, because the wage increase "largely influenced" the Board's finding that an unlawful refusal to bargain had occurred

  4. Joy Silk Mills v. National Labor Rel. Board

    185 F.2d 732 (D.C. Cir. 1950)   Cited 162 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In 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".

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ford

    170 F.2d 735 (6th Cir. 1948)   Cited 49 times

    No. 10605. November 15, 1948. On Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the National Labor Relations Board for enforcement of an order of the board against Wilbur H. Ford and others, doing business as Ford Brothers. Decree of enforcement granted. Harold Cranefield, of Detroit, Mich., and Robert N. Denham, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., of Washington, D.C. (David P. Finding, Ruth Weyand, and Thomas F. Maher, all of Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Edward G. Budd Mfg. Co.

    169 F.2d 571 (6th Cir. 1948)   Cited 46 times
    In NLRB v. Budd Mfg. Co., 169 F.2d 571, 577 (6th Cir. 1945), cert. denied, 335 U.S. 905, 69 S.Ct. 411, 93 L.Ed. 441 (1949), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals specifically rejected the notion that the protection afforded by the National Labor Relations Act is a constitutional right.

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Kohler Company

    220 F.2d 3 (7th Cir. 1955)   Cited 30 times

    Nos. 11272, 11283. March 7, 1955. Rehearing Denied April 7, 1955. David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Irving M. Herman, Atty., George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Samuel M. Singer, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for National Labor Relations Board. William F. Howe, Washington, D.C., Lyman C. Conger, Edward J. Hammer, Kohler, Wis., Jerome Powell, Gall, Lane Howe, Washington, D.C., for Kohler Co. Max Raskin, Milwaukee, Wis., David Rabinovitz, Sheboygan

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.

    179 F.2d 323 (8th Cir. 1950)   Cited 19 times

    No. 14013. January 16, 1950. Fannie M. Boyls, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Assistant General Counsel, and Thomas J. McDermott, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. on the brief), for petitioner. Robert H. Tucker, St. Paul, Minn. (Connolly, Tucker Post, St. Paul, Minn., on the brief), for respondent. Before SANBORN, JOHNSEN, and RIDDICK, Circuit Judges. SANBORN, Circuit Judge. The National

  9. Law v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    192 F.2d 236 (10th Cir. 1951)   Cited 10 times

    No. 4224. October 25, 1951. R.C. Garland, Las Cruces, N.M. (Garland Sanders, Las Cruces, N.M., on the brief), for petitioners. Arnold Ordman, Atty., NLRB, Washington, D.C. (George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, NLRB, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, NLRB, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, NLRB, Arnold Ordman, Atty., NLRB, all of Washington, D.C., and Rosanna A. Blake, Atty., NLRB, Takoma Park, Md., on the brief), for respondent. Before PHILLIPS, Chief Judge, and BRATTON and HUXMAN, Circuit

  10. Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy

    29 U.S.C. § 151   Cited 5,103 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"