Hartmann Luggage Co.

8 Cited authorities

Securities Comm'n v. Chenery Corp.
332 U.S. 194 (1947) Cited 4,198 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that if the agency rests its decision on "grounds are inadequate or improper, the court is powerless to affirm the administrative action by substituting what it considers to be a more adequate or proper basis"
Labor Board v. Katz
369 U.S. 736 (1962) Cited 710 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"
Gt. Northern Ry. v. Sunburst Co.
287 U.S. 358 (1932) Cited 590 times
Holding federal law does not prevent a state from choosing between prospective operation of its decision and that of relation backward
N.L.R.B. v. Rapid Bindery, Inc.
293 F.2d 170 (2d Cir. 1961) Cited 48 times
In NLRB v. Rapid Bindery Inc., 293 F.2d at 176, the Second Circuit held that "conjecture or rumor is not an adequate substitute for an employer's formal notice to a union of a vital change in working conditions.
N.L.R.B. v. A.P.W. Products Co.
316 F.2d 899 (2d Cir. 1963) Cited 40 times
No. 258, Docket 27676. Argued March 11, 1963. Decided April 25, 1963. Melvin Pollack, Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Gary Green, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Sidney A. Coven, Joseph Lepie, Boston, Mass., for respondent. Benjamin Wyle, New York City and Warren Woods, Washington, D.C., submitted brief as attorneys for amicus curiae, United Paper-makers and Paperworkers, AFL-CIO. Before MOORE, FRIENDLY
NLRB v. Item Co.
220 F.2d 956 (5th Cir. 1955) Cited 36 times
In National Labor Relations Board v. Item Company, 220 F.2d 956 (5th Cir. 1955), this court held that an employer had no confidentiality privilege to withhold from the union relevant wage data, "which the union's own employee-members apparently refused to disclose to it."
Town Country Manufacturing Co. v. N.L.R.B
316 F.2d 846 (5th Cir. 1963) Cited 22 times
In Town Country Manufacturing Co. v. NLRB, 316 F.2d 846 (5th Cir. 1963), this Court held that a company which contracted out work in part to rid itself of a union violated the NLRA, 29 U.S.C. § 158 et seq.
N.L.R.B. v. Adams Dairy, Inc.
322 F.2d 553 (8th Cir. 1963) Cited 17 times
No. 17171. September 12, 1963. Rehearings Denied October 11, 1963. Elliott Moore, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner and Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., and Melvin J. Welles, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., were with him on the brief. J. Leonard Schermer, St. Louis, Mo., for respondent. J. Leonard Schermer and Sylvan

Hartmann Luggage Co.

8 Cited authorities

Holding that if the agency rests its decision on "grounds are inadequate or improper, the court is powerless to affirm the administrative action by substituting what it considers to be a more adequate or proper basis"

Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

Holding federal law does not prevent a state from choosing between prospective operation of its decision and that of relation backward

In NLRB v. Rapid Bindery Inc., 293 F.2d at 176, the Second Circuit held that "conjecture or rumor is not an adequate substitute for an employer's formal notice to a union of a vital change in working conditions.

In National Labor Relations Board v. Item Company, 220 F.2d 956 (5th Cir. 1955), this court held that an employer had no confidentiality privilege to withhold from the union relevant wage data, "which the union's own employee-members apparently refused to disclose to it."

In Town Country Manufacturing Co. v. NLRB, 316 F.2d 846 (5th Cir. 1963), this Court held that a company which contracted out work in part to rid itself of a union violated the NLRA, 29 U.S.C. § 158 et seq.