§

Formed Tubes Southern, Inc.

156 N.L.R.B. 1476 (N.L.R.B. 1966)
Formed Tubes Southern, Inc.

8 Cited authorities

  1. Machinists Local v. Labor Board

    362 U.S. 411 (1960)   Cited 276 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “a finding of violation which is inescapably grounded on events predating the limitations period” is untimely

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

    311 U.S. 72 (1940)   Cited 317 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."

  3. 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

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Birmingham Publishing Company

    262 F.2d 2 (5th Cir. 1959)   Cited 66 times
    In NLRB v. Birmingham, supra, 262 F.2d at 6-8, an employee requested from company supervisors information on how to transfer to another union.

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Dan River Mills, Incorporated

    274 F.2d 381 (5th Cir. 1960)   Cited 61 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Dan River Mills, Inc., 5 Cir., 274 F.2d 381, the unit consisted of 332 employees of which 167 constituted a majority.

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Griggs Equipment, Inc.

    307 F.2d 275 (5th Cir. 1962)   Cited 52 times
    In Griggs, the issue was not even mentioned in the Board's Decision, but is noted in the decision of the court of appeals.

  7. 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

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Entwistle Mfg. Co.

    120 F.2d 532 (4th Cir. 1941)   Cited 15 times

    No. 4770. June 10, 1941. On Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the National Labor Relations Board to enforce its order against the Entwistle Manufacturing Company. Order modified and enforced. Walter B. Wilbur, of Washington, D.C., Atty., National Labor Relations Board (Robert B. Watts, Gen. Counsel, Laurence A. Knapp, Associate Gen. Counsel, Ernest A. Gross, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Sylvester Garrett, and William Stix, all of Washington, D.C., Attys