§

Edinburg Manufacturing Co.

164 N.L.R.B. 121 (N.L.R.B. 1967)
Edinburg Manufacturing Co.

8 Cited authorities

  1. Hendrix Manufacturing Company v. N.L.R.B

    321 F.2d 100 (5th Cir. 1963)   Cited 91 times
    Permitting the Board to consider the employer's clear expression of opposition to the union as background in order to determine motivation for management's conduct

  2. N.L.R.B. v. Camco, Incorporated

    340 F.2d 803 (5th Cir. 1965)   Cited 76 times
    Holding that knowledge of union activities could be inferred from the fact that an employer discharged eleven of sixteen union adherents without discharging any of its remaining seventy-four employees

  3. Shattuck Denn Mining Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    362 F.2d 466 (9th Cir. 1966)   Cited 56 times
    Upholding Board's determination that discharge for insubordination was pretextual where employer "refused to discharge" another employee also accused of insubordination

  4. Ohio Power Co. v. N.L.R.B

    176 F.2d 385 (6th Cir. 1949)   Cited 64 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that plain and unambiguous text must be applied as written without resort to construction

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Lindsay Newspapers, Inc.

    315 F.2d 709 (5th Cir. 1963)   Cited 25 times
    In NLRB v. Lindsay Newspapers, Inc., 315 F.2d 709 (5th Cir. 1963), the court listed seventeen factors which supported the Board's conclusion of employee status.

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Harbison-Fischer Manufacturing Co.

    304 F.2d 738 (5th Cir. 1962)   Cited 19 times

    No. 19105. June 20, 1962. Melvin Pollack, Atty., N.L.R.B., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, for petitioner. Karl Mueller, Fort Worth, Tex., Harold E. Mueller, Mueller Mueller, Fort Worth, Tex., for respondent. Before HUTCHESON, WISDOM, and BELL, Circuit Judges. GRIFFIN B. BELL, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board here seeks enforcement of its order against Harbison-Fischer

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dant

    207 F.2d 165 (9th Cir. 1953)   Cited 9 times

    No. 12985. September 15, 1953. George J. Bott, General Counsel, David P. Findling, Asst. Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Norton J. Come, Morris A. Solomon, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for appellant. Raymond S. Smathurst, Washington, D.C., J.P. Stirling, Roscoe Watts, John T. Casey, Portland, Or., for appellee. Before HEALY, BONE and ORR, Circuit Judges. ORR, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board, hereafter the Board, requests enforcement

  8. National Labor Rel. Board v. Gen. Shoe Corp.

    207 F.2d 598 (6th Cir. 1953)

    No. 11832. October 22, 1953. Geo. J. Bott, A. Norman Somers and Rosanna A. Blake, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Bass, Berry Sims, J.V. Hindman, Nashville, Tenn., for respondent. Before ALLEN, McALLISTER and MILLER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This case came on to be heard on the briefs and record and oral argument of counsel; And it appearing that certain of the employer's communications to and interrogations of the employees as to their union membership and activities were accompanied by implied