§

Gibson Products Co. of Washington Parish, La., Inc.

199 N.L.R.B. 794 (N.L.R.B. 1972)
Gibson Products Co. of Washington Parish, La., Inc.

19 Cited authorities

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

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,035 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  2. Labor Board v. Parts Co.

    375 U.S. 405 (1964)   Cited 213 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”

  3. Franks Bros. Co. v. Labor Board

    321 U.S. 702 (1944)   Cited 252 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the legitimacy of the Board's view that the unlawful refusal to bargain collectively with employees' chosen representative disrupts employee morale, deters organizational activities, and discourages membership in unions.

  4. Labor Board v. Cheney Lumber Co.

    327 U.S. 385 (1946)   Cited 137 times
    Noting § 10(e) insures that "all controversies of fact, and the allowable inferences from the facts, be threshed out . . . in the first instance before the Board"

  5. Labor Board v. Donnelly Co.

    330 U.S. 219 (1947)   Cited 128 times
    Holding that a hearing examiner's prior adverse ruling did not prevent him from adjudicating the same case on retrial even though the examiner's initial decision had been reversed for improper exclusion of evidence

  6. N.L.R.B. v. American Cable Systems, Inc.

    427 F.2d 446 (5th Cir. 1970)   Cited 51 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Board must consider current circumstances when issuing a bargaining order following Gissel.

  7. WM. G. ROE COMPANY v. ARMOUR COMPANY

    414 F.2d 862 (5th Cir. 1969)   Cited 30 times
    Holding that where the appellate court remanded the case to the trial court for more specific findings, "it was . . . within the court's power on remand to find that it had been wrong the first time and reverse itself."

  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. American Cable Systems, Inc.

    414 F.2d 661 (5th Cir. 1969)   Cited 24 times
    In American Cable, this court, interpreting Gissel just a month after it was decided, required that the Board make specific findings that the union had a card majority, that the unfair labor practices were "serious and extensive," that traditional remedies would be unlikely to insure a fair election, and that the employees' interests would be best served by a bargaining order.

  10. Wausau Steel Corporation v. N.L.R.B

    377 F.2d 369 (7th Cir. 1967)   Cited 21 times

    No. 15840. April 11, 1967. Richard P. Tinkham, of Smith, Puchner, Tinkham Smith, Wausau, Wis., for petitioner. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Glen M. Bendixsen, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Melvin H. Reifin, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, for respondent. Before HASTINGS, Chief Judge, and SCHNACKENBERG and KILEY, Circuit Judges. HASTINGS, Chief Judge. The Wausau Steel Corporation