Fieldcrest Mills, Inc.

21 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.
385 U.S. 432 (1967) Cited 265 times 4 Legal Analyses
Approving "discovery-type standard"
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
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. C & C Plywood Corp.
385 U.S. 421 (1967) Cited 117 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the NLRB has the authority to interpret CBAs in the first instance where its interpretation is for the purpose of “enforc[ing] a statutory right which Congress considered necessary to allow labor and management to get on with the process of reaching fair terms and conditions of employment”
Curtiss-Wright, Wright Aero. Div. v. N.L.R.B
347 F.2d 61 (3d Cir. 1965) Cited 55 times
Noting the Board has "considerable leeway in amplifying or expanding certain details not specifically set forth in the complaint if they accord with the general substance of the complaint"
Timken Roller Bearing Company v. N.L.R.B
325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963) Cited 56 times
In Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. NLRB, 325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 971, 84 S.Ct. 1135, 12 L.Ed.2d 85 (1964), the court considered a union request for information concerning five grievances that awaited hearings before a chosen arbitrator.
Fafnir Bearing Company v. N.L.R.B
362 F.2d 716 (2d Cir. 1966) Cited 24 times
Relying upon the “clear and unmistakable waiver” rule
NLRB v. Item Co.
220 F.2d 956 (5th Cir. 1955) Cited 36 times
In National Labor Relations Board v. Item Company, 220 F.2d 956 (5th Cir. 1955), this court held that an employer had no confidentiality privilege to withhold from the union relevant wage data, "which the union's own employee-members apparently refused to disclose to it."
General Electric Company v. N.L.R.B
414 F.2d 918 (4th Cir. 1969) Cited 17 times
Holding that employer committed an unfair labor practice by failing to disclose results of survey of wages paid by other employers in the area in response to request by union
National Labor Rel. Board v. J.H. Allison Co.
165 F.2d 766 (6th Cir. 1948) Cited 44 times
No. 10411. January 26, 1948. On Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by National Labor Relations Board, for enforcement of its order directing J.H. Allison Co. to cease and desist from refusing to bargain collectively concerning so-called "merit wage increases" with a labor union, as exclusive representative and bargaining agent of its production workers and to grant no merit wage increases to such employees without prior consultation with the union
Walls Manufacturing Company v. N.L.R.B
321 F.2d 753 (D.C. Cir. 1963) Cited 23 times
Holding that complaint to state health department was protected conduct given lack of evidence that "the allegations were made with intent to falsify or maliciously injure the [employer]"
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"

Fieldcrest Mills, Inc.

21 Cited authorities

Approving "discovery-type standard"

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

Noting the Board has "considerable leeway in amplifying or expanding certain details not specifically set forth in the complaint if they accord with the general substance of the complaint"

In Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. NLRB, 325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 971, 84 S.Ct. 1135, 12 L.Ed.2d 85 (1964), the court considered a union request for information concerning five grievances that awaited hearings before a chosen arbitrator.

Relying upon the “clear and unmistakable waiver” rule

In National Labor Relations Board v. Item Company, 220 F.2d 956 (5th Cir. 1955), this court held that an employer had no confidentiality privilege to withhold from the union relevant wage data, "which the union's own employee-members apparently refused to disclose to it."

Holding that employer committed an unfair labor practice by failing to disclose results of survey of wages paid by other employers in the area in response to request by union

Holding that complaint to state health department was protected conduct given lack of evidence that "the allegations were made with intent to falsify or maliciously injure the [employer]"

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"