§

General Drivers and Dairy Employees Local 563

176 N.L.R.B. 386 (N.L.R.B. 1969)
General Drivers and Dairy Employees Local 563

13 Cited authorities

  1. 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"

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.

    388 U.S. 175 (1967)   Cited 334 times
    Holding that majority rule concept is at the center of federal labor policy

  3. Labor Board v. Denver Bldg. Council

    341 U.S. 675 (1951)   Cited 494 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Board's assertion of jurisdiction over activities taking place at local construction site based on finding that "any widespread application of the practices charged might well result in substantially decreasing" the flow of interstate commerce

  4. Electrical Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 667 (1961)   Cited 186 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union may picket a secondary employer only when the primary employer is at the job site

  5. Labor Board v. Rice Milling Co.

    341 U.S. 665 (1951)   Cited 126 times
    Noting that section 8(b) was intended to preserve "the right of labor organizations to bring pressure to bear on offending employers in primary labor disputes"

  6. Steelworkers v. Labor Board

    376 U.S. 492 (1964)   Cited 75 times
    Stating that section 8(b) prohibits labor unions from engaging in "secondary boycotting" by "exert[ing] pressure on an employer not involved in the relevant labor dispute ('the secondary employer') in order to obtain a favorable result in the ongoing labor dispute with another employer ('the primary employer')"

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bus. Mach

    228 F.2d 553 (2d Cir. 1955)   Cited 67 times
    In National Labor Relations Bd. v. Business Mach. etc., CIO (228 F.2d 553) the Circuit Court of Appeals for this circuit declared (p. 559) that "The only thing proscribed by § 8(b)(4) is inducement or encouragement of the employees of the customers".

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Serv. Trade C

    191 F.2d 65 (2d Cir. 1951)   Cited 44 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Service Trade Chauffeurs, etc., supra, it was said: "We take this to mean that a union may lawfully inflict harm on a neutral employer, without violating § 8 (b) (4), so long as the harm is merely incidental to a traditionally lawful primary strike, conducted at the place where the primary employer does business."

  9. Markwell and Hartz, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    387 F.2d 79 (5th Cir. 1967)   Cited 21 times

    Nos. 23083, 23214. December 4, 1967. Richard C. Keenan, New Orleans, La., Wells T. Lovett, Owensboro, Ky., Winthrop A. Johns, Washington, D.C. (amicus curiae) for petitioner Markwell and Hartz, Inc. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Morton J. Come, Atty., N.L.R.B., Louis Sherman, (intervenor) Charles R. Donnenfeld, Washington D.C. (intervenor), for respondent N.L.R.B. Marcel Mallet-Provost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Morton J. Come, Atty., N.L.R.B., Winthrop A. Johns, Washington

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Highway Truckdrivers and Helpers

    300 F.2d 317 (3d Cir. 1962)   Cited 22 times

    No. 13607. Argued October 31, 1961. Decided February 23, 1962. As Amended April 10, 1962. Warren M. Davison, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Allison W. Brown, Jr., Atty., National Labor Relations Board, on the brief), for petitioner. Richard H. Markowitz, Philadelphia, Pa. (Paula R. Markowitz, Wilderman, Markowitz Kirschner, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for respondent. Before McLAUGHLIN, STALEY