Illinois Bell Telephone Co.

24 Cited authorities

J.I. Case Co. v. Labor Board
321 U.S. 332 (1944) Cited 457 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that the result of a collective bargaining agreement is not "a contract of employment except in rare cases; no one has a job by reason of it and no obligation to any individual ordinarily comes into existence from it alone"
Labor Board v. Mackay Co.
304 U.S. 333 (1938) Cited 535 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices
Labor Board v. Sands Mfg. Co.
306 U.S. 332 (1939) Cited 139 times
In N.L.R.B. v. Sands Mfg. Co., 306 U.S. 332, 59 S.Ct. 508, 83 L.Ed. 682, affirming the ruling of this Court in 6 Cir., 96 F.2d 721, the Supreme Court held the employer justified in abandoning further negotiations with the Union when conditions showed the uselessness of continuing with them.
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co.
130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942) Cited 69 times 1 Legal Analyses
In NLRB v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co., 130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942), Judge Learned Hand stated his view of the type of activity protected by section 7.
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Edward G. Budd Mfg. Co.
169 F.2d 571 (6th Cir. 1948) Cited 46 times
In NLRB v. Budd Mfg. Co., 169 F.2d 571, 577 (6th Cir. 1945), cert. denied, 335 U.S. 905, 69 S.Ct. 411, 93 L.Ed. 441 (1949), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals specifically rejected the notion that the protection afforded by the National Labor Relations Act is a constitutional right.
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Draper Corp.
145 F.2d 199 (4th Cir. 1944) Cited 48 times
No. 5239. October 6, 1944. On Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by the National Labor Relations Board for enforcement of an order of the Board which directed the Draper Corporation to cease and desist from unfair labor practices. Petition denied. Guy Farmer, Associate General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, of Washington, D.C. (Alvin J. Rockwell, General Counsel, Malcolm F. Halliday, Associate General Counsel, Joseph B. Robison, and Dominick
National Labor Relations Bd. v. Remington Rand
130 F.2d 919 (2d Cir. 1942) Cited 51 times
In N.L.R.B. v. Remington Rand, 2 Cir., 130 F.2d 919, 925, we held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, rule 53(e)(2), 28 U.S.C.A. — which provides that a Master's findings stand unless clearly erroneous — would be applicable, by analogy, to findings of a Master appointed by a court of appeals.
Sax v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
171 F.2d 769 (7th Cir. 1948) Cited 33 times
In Sax v. N.L.R.B., 7 Cir., 171 F.2d 769 (1948), and N.L.R.B. v. Armour Co., 5 Cir., 213 F.2d 625 (1954), the "perfunctory, innocuous remarks" stood "alone".
N.L.R.B. v. Reynolds Internat. Pen
162 F.2d 680 (7th Cir. 1947) Cited 31 times
In N.L.R.B. v. Reynolds International Pen Co., 7 Cir., 162 F.2d 680, this Court decided that employees who engage in a walkout because of a dissatisfaction with a change in foreman, are not protected by the Act and are subject to discharge.
National Labor Rel. Board v. Mylan-Sparta Co.
166 F.2d 485 (6th Cir. 1948) Cited 29 times
In Mylan-Sparta, the Board found the employer in violation of sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) when it discharged a number of employees for engaging in union activities.

Illinois Bell Telephone Co.

24 Cited authorities

Holding that the result of a collective bargaining agreement is not "a contract of employment except in rare cases; no one has a job by reason of it and no obligation to any individual ordinarily comes into existence from it alone"

Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices

In N.L.R.B. v. Sands Mfg. Co., 306 U.S. 332, 59 S.Ct. 508, 83 L.Ed. 682, affirming the ruling of this Court in 6 Cir., 96 F.2d 721, the Supreme Court held the employer justified in abandoning further negotiations with the Union when conditions showed the uselessness of continuing with them.

In NLRB v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co., 130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942), Judge Learned Hand stated his view of the type of activity protected by section 7.

In NLRB v. Budd Mfg. Co., 169 F.2d 571, 577 (6th Cir. 1945), cert. denied, 335 U.S. 905, 69 S.Ct. 411, 93 L.Ed. 441 (1949), the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals specifically rejected the notion that the protection afforded by the National Labor Relations Act is a constitutional right.

In N.L.R.B. v. Remington Rand, 2 Cir., 130 F.2d 919, 925, we held that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, rule 53(e)(2), 28 U.S.C.A. — which provides that a Master's findings stand unless clearly erroneous — would be applicable, by analogy, to findings of a Master appointed by a court of appeals.

In Sax v. N.L.R.B., 7 Cir., 171 F.2d 769 (1948), and N.L.R.B. v. Armour Co., 5 Cir., 213 F.2d 625 (1954), the "perfunctory, innocuous remarks" stood "alone".

In N.L.R.B. v. Reynolds International Pen Co., 7 Cir., 162 F.2d 680, this Court decided that employees who engage in a walkout because of a dissatisfaction with a change in foreman, are not protected by the Act and are subject to discharge.

In Mylan-Sparta, the Board found the employer in violation of sections 8(a)(1) and 8(a)(3) when it discharged a number of employees for engaging in union activities.