§

Hydro-Molding Co., Inc.

183 N.L.R.B. 614 (N.L.R.B. 1970)
Hydro-Molding Co., Inc.

7 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. Cabot Carbon Co.

    360 U.S. 203 (1959)   Cited 57 times
    Concluding that "dealing with" as used in 29 U.S.C. § 152 is a "broad term" and is not synonymous to "bargaining with"

  3. Hendrix Manufacturing Company v. N.L.R.B

    321 F.2d 100 (5th Cir. 1963)   Cited 91 times
    Permitting the Board to consider the employer's clear expression of opposition to the union as background in order to determine motivation for management's conduct

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Walton Manufacturing Company

    289 F.2d 177 (5th Cir. 1961)   Cited 32 times

    No. 18345. March 17, 1961. Russell Specter, Atty., N.L.R.B., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Melvin Pollack, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Robert T. Thompson, Alexander E. Wilson, Jr., Wilson, Branch Barwick, J. Frank Ogletree, Jr., Atlanta, Ga., for respondent. Before RIVES and WISDOM, Circuit Judges, and CHRISTENBERRY, District Judge. RIVES, Circuit Judge. This petition seeks enforcement

  5. American Boiler Manufacturers v. N.L.R.B

    366 F.2d 815 (8th Cir. 1966)   Cited 21 times
    In American Boiler, the complaint alleged a fabrication clause in a collective-bargaining contract was being unlawfully applied by the parties, but the issue of legality of the clause was not passed on by the Board, even though the validity of the clause would be dispositive and was fully litigated by the parties; this Court remanded to the Board to determine the legality of the clause.

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Great E. Color Lithographic Corp.

    309 F.2d 352 (2d Cir. 1962)   Cited 21 times

    No. 53, Docket 27470. Argued October 19, 1962. Decided November 1, 1962. A. Brummel, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallett-Prevost, Assistant General Counsel, and Melvin Pollack, Washington, D.C., on the brief) for petitioner. James E. Birdsall of Warner Birdsall, New York City, for respondent. Before WATERMAN, HAYS and MARSHALL, Circuit Judges. HAYS, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Jamestown Sterling

    211 F.2d 725 (2d Cir. 1954)   Cited 29 times

    No. 170, Docket 22862. Argued March 9, 1954. Decided April 5, 1954. George J. Bott, David P. Findling, A. Norman Somers, Owsley Vose and Jean Engstrom, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Rogerson Hewes, J. Russell Rogerson, Jamestown, N.Y., for respondent. Before CLARK, MEDINA and HARLAN, Circuit Judges. MEDINA, Circuit Judge. This case involves a more or less typical controversy between employer and employees. In the week of July 7, 1952, following the shutdown of the plant in the Village of Falconer