Federated Department Stores, Inc. And Palm Coat Building

10 Cited authorities

Sears, Roebuck Co. v. Carpenters
436 U.S. 180 (1978) Cited 554 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that both state and federal courts must defer to the National Labor Relations Board when an activity is arguably protected under § 7 or prohibited by § 8 of the NLRA
Hudgens v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
424 U.S. 507 (1976) Cited 543 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding picketers "did not have a First Amendment right to enter [a privately owned] shopping center for the purpose of advertising their strike"
National Woodwork Manufacturers Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
386 U.S. 612 (1967) Cited 392 times
Holding that union employees' refusal to install third-party manufacturer's product was not prohibited under § 158(b)(B), because it was an action "pressuring the [union members'] employer for agreements regulating relations between [the employer] and his own employees"
Connell Co. v. Plumbers Steamfitters
421 U.S. 616 (1975) Cited 285 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that an agreement between a union and a nonlabor party, which is wholly-unrelated to any collective-bargaining effort on the part of the union and which operates or threatens to operate as a restraint on trade, may be the basis for a federal antitrust suit
Labor Board v. Babcock Wilcox Co.
351 U.S. 105 (1956) Cited 294 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot
Labor Bd. v. Washington Aluminum Co.
370 U.S. 9 (1962) Cited 206 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections
Labor Board v. Servette
377 U.S. 46 (1964) Cited 74 times
Holding under section 8(b) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b), that statutory protection for the distribution of handbills would be undermined if a threat to engage in protected conduct were not itself protected
Edward J. DeBartolo Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
463 U.S. 147 (1983) Cited 21 times
Vacating and remanding for consideration of statutory question
Giant Food Markets, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
633 F.2d 18 (6th Cir. 1980) Cited 13 times
Observing that generally it will be easier to communicate with a specific number of discrete employees than with potential customers of a large retail store
Seattle-First Nat. Bank v. N.L.R.B
651 F.2d 1272 (9th Cir. 1980) Cited 4 times
In Seattle-First National Bank v. NLRB, 651 F.2d 1272 (9th Cir. 1980), the picketing site was an area outside the entrance to a large restaurant located on the forty-sixth floor of an office building.

Federated Department Stores, Inc. And Palm Coat Building

10 Cited authorities

Holding that both state and federal courts must defer to the National Labor Relations Board when an activity is arguably protected under § 7 or prohibited by § 8 of the NLRA

Holding picketers "did not have a First Amendment right to enter [a privately owned] shopping center for the purpose of advertising their strike"

Holding that union employees' refusal to install third-party manufacturer's product was not prohibited under § 158(b)(B), because it was an action "pressuring the [union members'] employer for agreements regulating relations between [the employer] and his own employees"

Holding that an agreement between a union and a nonlabor party, which is wholly-unrelated to any collective-bargaining effort on the part of the union and which operates or threatens to operate as a restraint on trade, may be the basis for a federal antitrust suit

Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot

Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections

Holding under section 8(b) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b), that statutory protection for the distribution of handbills would be undermined if a threat to engage in protected conduct were not itself protected

Vacating and remanding for consideration of statutory question

Observing that generally it will be easier to communicate with a specific number of discrete employees than with potential customers of a large retail store

In Seattle-First National Bank v. NLRB, 651 F.2d 1272 (9th Cir. 1980), the picketing site was an area outside the entrance to a large restaurant located on the forty-sixth floor of an office building.