Gary-Hobart Water Corp.

12 Cited authorities

Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills
353 U.S. 448 (1957) Cited 2,330 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that § 301 expresses a federal policy in favor of the enforceability of labor contracts
Teamsters Local v. Lucas Flour Co.
369 U.S. 95 (1962) Cited 1,181 times
Holding that "under the mandate of Lincoln Mills " federal labor law is "paramount" when deciding issues raised under § 301
Boys Markets v. Clerks Union
398 U.S. 235 (1970) Cited 859 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Norris–LaGuardia Act's anti-injunction provisions do not bar enforcement of arbitration agreements
Labor Board v. Erie Resistor Corp.
373 U.S. 221 (1963) Cited 359 times 1 Legal Analyses
Upholding Board decision prohibiting employer from granting super-seniority to strike-breakers because "[s]uper-seniority renders future bargaining difficult, if not impossible"
Mastro Plastics Corp. v. Labor Board
350 U.S. 270 (1956) Cited 403 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that collective-bargaining agreement "must be read as a whole and in light of the law relating to it when it was made"
Labor Board v. Rockaway News Co.
345 U.S. 71 (1953) Cited 128 times
Holding that employees may bargain away their statutory right to strike
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.
N.L.R.B. v. Rockwell-Standard, Trans. Axle
410 F.2d 953 (6th Cir. 1969) Cited 44 times
No. 18651. May 29, 1969. Leonard M. Wagman, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner, Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Neal J. Conway, Atty., Washington, D.C., on brief. Leonard L. Scheinholtz, Pittsburgh, Pa., for respondent, Jonathan L. Alder, Reed, Smith, Shaw McClay, Pittsburgh, Pa., on brief. Before PHILLIPS, EDWARDS and PECK, Circuit Judges. Judge Edwards took no part in the consideration of decision of this case
Kellogg Company v. N.L.R.B
457 F.2d 519 (6th Cir. 1972) Cited 33 times
In Kellogg Co. v. NLRB, 457 F.2d 519, 525 (6th Cir. 1972), we stated that the employees' right to honor another's picketline may only be waived through "clear and unmistakable language."
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co.
130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942) Cited 69 times 1 Legal Analyses
In NLRB v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co., 130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942), Judge Learned Hand stated his view of the type of activity protected by section 7.

Gary-Hobart Water Corp.

12 Cited authorities

Holding that § 301 expresses a federal policy in favor of the enforceability of labor contracts

Holding that "under the mandate of Lincoln Mills " federal labor law is "paramount" when deciding issues raised under § 301

Holding that the Norris–LaGuardia Act's anti-injunction provisions do not bar enforcement of arbitration agreements

Upholding Board decision prohibiting employer from granting super-seniority to strike-breakers because "[s]uper-seniority renders future bargaining difficult, if not impossible"

Holding that collective-bargaining agreement "must be read as a whole and in light of the law relating to it when it was made"

Holding that employees may bargain away their statutory right to strike

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.

In Kellogg Co. v. NLRB, 457 F.2d 519, 525 (6th Cir. 1972), we stated that the employees' right to honor another's picketline may only be waived through "clear and unmistakable language."

In NLRB v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co., 130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942), Judge Learned Hand stated his view of the type of activity protected by section 7.