§

General Stencils, Inc.

195 N.L.R.B. 1109 (N.L.R.B. 1972)
General Stencils, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,036 times   71 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  2. Radio Officers v. Labor Board

    347 U.S. 17 (1954)   Cited 471 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he policy of the Act is to insulate employees' jobs from their organizational rights"

  3. Labor Board v. Link-Belt Co.

    311 U.S. 584 (1941)   Cited 338 times
    Finding a violation of the Act when a supervisor mistakenly believed an employee was involved with the union and discharged him "because of his alleged union activities"

  4. Textile Workers v. Darlington Co.

    380 U.S. 263 (1965)   Cited 168 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer has the absolute right, at least as far as the NLRA is concerned, to terminate his entire business for any reason

  5. N.L.R.B. v. L.B. Foster Company

    418 F.2d 1 (9th Cir. 1969)   Cited 47 times
    In Foster, the Ninth Circuit answered: "Emphasis is given to the rapid turnover in the employer's personnel as a reason for not enforcing the order.

  6. N.L.R.B. v. General Stencils, Inc.

    438 F.2d 894 (2d Cir. 1971)   Cited 38 times
    In General Stencils we compared and contrasted cases involving coercive interrogation, threats to close plants, discriminatory discharges, loss of benefits and the like, id. at 903, with the facts in General Stencils, which principally involved unlawful interrogation of one employee about his statement to a Board agent, coupled with threats to a few employees to withdraw benefits of a relatively minor nature.

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Drives, Incorporated

    440 F.2d 354 (7th Cir. 1971)   Cited 30 times
    In NLRB v. Drives, Inc., 440 F.2d 354, 364 (7 Cir.), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 912, 92 S.Ct. 229, 30 L.Ed.2d 185 (1971), the court upheld the Board's ruling that an employer had violated § 8(a)(1) when he distributed a survey shortly before a representation election requesting employees to make specific suggestions for improvements in working conditions and implying that the improvements would come only if the union were defeated.

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Kostel Corporation

    440 F.2d 347 (7th Cir. 1971)   Cited 27 times
    In NLRB v. Kostel Corp., 440 F.2d 347, 350-351 (7th Cir. 1971), the court recognized an initially invalid demand as an adequate basis for a "continuing demand," where the company requested that the matter of representation be deferred for more than three weeks during which time the union did in fact reach majority status.

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Sinclair Company

    397 F.2d 157 (1st Cir. 1968)   Cited 28 times
    In NLRB v. Sinclair Co., 397 F.2d 157, 161 (1st Cir. 1968), one of the three consolidated cases disposed of in the Gissel opinion, the Court of Appeals said, "Whether an employer has used language that is coercive in its effect is a question essentially for the specialized experience of the Board."

  10. N.L.R.B. v. J.H. RUTTER REX MANUFACTURING CO

    415 F.2d 1133 (6th Cir. 1969)   Cited 3 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. J.H. Rutter Rex Mfg. Co., 415 F.2d 1133, this Court enforced certain parts of the Board's original order reported at 164 N.L.R.B. No. 5. The cause was remanded to the Board for further findings with respect to the alleged violations of § 8(a)(5), in the light of N.L.R.B. v. Gissel Packing Co., 395 U.S. 575, 89 S.Ct. 1918, 23 L.Ed.2d 547.