§

Howard Johnson Co.

174 N.L.R.B. 1217 (N.L.R.B. 1969)
Howard Johnson Co.

18 Cited authorities

  1. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,674 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

  2. Board v. Hearst Publications

    322 U.S. 111 (1944)   Cited 791 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Determining whether newsboys were independent contractors or employees under the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA")

  3. Labor Board v. Atkins Co.

    331 U.S. 398 (1947)   Cited 79 times
    Holding that employer-employee relationship is determined by power to set wages and hours, coupled with the financial burden of the wages and receipt of the benefits of the work, as well as the absolute power to hire and fire or the power to control all the activities of the worker

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Security Guard Service, Inc.

    384 F.2d 143 (5th Cir. 1967)   Cited 53 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing "the standard reluctance to apply [a statutory] exception broadly"

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. S. Bleachery

    257 F.2d 235 (4th Cir. 1958)   Cited 33 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the essential inquiry is whether the employer shares the power of management

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Lindsay Newspapers, Inc.

    315 F.2d 709 (5th Cir. 1963)   Cited 25 times
    In NLRB v. Lindsay Newspapers, Inc., 315 F.2d 709 (5th Cir. 1963), the court listed seventeen factors which supported the Board's conclusion of employee status.

  7. International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    339 F.2d 116 (2d Cir. 1964)   Cited 22 times
    In International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union v. NLRB, supra, MR. JUSTICE (then Circuit Judge) MARSHALL explained that "[a]lthough the Act makes no special provision for 'managerial employees,' under a Board policy of long duration, this category of personnel has been excluded from the protection of the Act."

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Randolph Electric Membership Corp.

    343 F.2d 60 (4th Cir. 1965)   Cited 20 times
    In Randolph, unlike our case, there was no holding by the state's highest court that the private utilities were political subdivisions of the state.

  9. Dubin-Haskell Lining Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    375 F.2d 568 (4th Cir. 1967)   Cited 17 times
    In Dubin-Haskell Lining Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 375 F.2d 568 (4 Cir. 1967), a panel of this Court granted enforcement in part, and denied enforcement in part, of an order of the National Labor Relations Board. The order concerned a certain Fred Cox, an employee in the shipping department of the company.

  10. Northern Virginia Steel Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    300 F.2d 168 (4th Cir. 1962)   Cited 21 times

    No. 8450. Argued January 8, 1962. Decided March 13, 1962. Henry St. J. FitzGerald, Arlington, Va. (Tolbert, Lewis FitzGerald, Arlington, Va., on the brief), for petitioner. Hans J. Lehmann, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Samuel M. Singer, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for respondent. Before SOBELOFF, Chief Judge, and BRYAN and J. SPENCER BELL, Circuit Judges