Labor Board v. Mackay Co.

Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. C & C Plywood Corp.

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”

N.L.R.B. v. Interboro Contractors, Inc.

In NLRB v. Interboro Contractors, Inc., 388 F.2d 495, 500 (2d Cir. 1967), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit stated that the efforts of an individual employee acting alone to enforce the provisions of a collective bargaining agreement may be deemed "concerted," and thus protected, at least when the individual's interpretation of the agreement has a reasonable basis.

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Thor Power Tool Co.

Concluding that "when the entire record is considered there was substantial evidence to support the Board's finding that [employee's] discharge was the result of his having presented a grievance to the management" even though employee was overheard referring to company's superintendent as "the horse's ass" and was thereafter summarily discharged

N.L.R.B. v. Guernsey-Muskingum Electric Co-op

Finding concerted activity because "a reasonable inference can be drawn that the men involved considered that they had a grievance and decided, among themselves, that they would take it up with management"

Ramsey v. N.L.R.B

In Ramsey v. NLRB, 327 F.2d 784 (7th Cir.) cert. denied, 377 U.S. 1003, 84 S.Ct. 1938, 12 L.Ed.2d 1052 (1964), the Seventh Circuit declared that "[t]here is no statutory or constitutional right to be present at an arbitration hearing," rejecting the employee's contention that his rights were denied since he was not given notice of the arbitration hearing and did not appear there. The court specifically noted that the facts showed "that the company fully and adequately defended [the employee's] rights at the hearing."

Kirby v. Tallmadge

In Kirby v. Tallmadge, 160 U.S. 379, 16 S.Ct. 349, 351, 40 L.Ed. 463, the court approved the following quotation from Starkie on Evidence, Vol. I, page 54, to wit: "The conduct of the party in omitting to produce that evidence in elucidation of the subject-matter in dispute, which is within his power, and which rests peculiarly within his own knowledge, frequently affords occasion for presumptions against him, since it raises strong suspicion that such evidence, if adduced, would operate to his prejudice."

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Phœnix Mut. Life Ins.

Supporting employees' entitlement to write a letter complaining about supervisor

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co.

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.

N.L.R.B. v. Symons Manufacturing Co.