10 Cited authorities
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.
388 U.S. 175 (1967) Cited 334 timesHolding that majority rule concept is at the center of federal labor policy
Pattern Makers' League v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
473 U.S. 95 (1985) Cited 76 times 2 Legal AnalysesUpholding the NLRB's interpretation of the Act
Scofield v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
394 U.S. 423 (1969) Cited 117 times 6 Legal AnalysesUpholding union rule, enforceable by fines and expulsion, imposing limitation on immediate pay that members could receive for piecework because Court found no "impairment of statutory labor policy"
Florida Power Light v. Electrical Workers
417 U.S. 790 (1974) Cited 96 timesIn Florida Power Light Co. v. IBEW, Local 641, 417 U.S. 790, 804-05, 94 S.Ct. 2737, 2744-45, 41 L.Ed.2d 477 (1974), the Supreme Court held that no § 8(b)(1)(B) violation occurs unless the disciplined conduct adversely affects the performance of his or her § 8(b)(1)(B) duties.
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Granite State Joint Board, Textile Workers Union of America, Local 1029
409 U.S. 213 (1972) Cited 53 timesIn NLRB v. Textile Workers, supra, and Machinists v. NLRB, 412 U.S. 84 (1973) (per curiam), the Court found as a corollary that unions may not fine former members who have resigned lawfully.
American Broadcasting Cos. v. Writers Guild
437 U.S. 411 (1978) Cited 27 timesIn American Broadcasting Cos. v. Writers Guild, West, Inc., 437 U.S. 411 (1978) (ABC), the Court found that discipline imposed on grievance-handling supervisors who crossed union picket lines violated § 8(b)(1)(B), even though the supervisor-members did not adjust grievances for the striking employees, but only for employees whom the striking union did not represent or desire to represent.
N.L.R.B. v. Hershey Foods Corporation
513 F.2d 1083 (9th Cir. 1975) Cited 21 timesNo. 74-2114. April 15, 1975. Elliott Moore, Deputy Assoc. Gen. Counsel, NLRB, Joseph E. Mayer, Atty., William R. Stewart, Atty. (argued), Washington, D. C., for petitioner. Duane B. Beeson, San Francisco, Cal. (argued), for respondent. George J. Tichy, II, San Francisco, for intervenor. Before CARTER, WRIGHT and WALLACE, Circuit Judges. OPINION WALLACE, Circuit Judge: The National Labor Relations Board brought this action to enforce its orders against Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen Helpers Union
N.L.R.B. v. Intern. Broth. of Elec. W.
758 F.2d 436 (9th Cir. 1985) Cited 9 timesNo. 84-7355. Argued and Submitted February 7, 1985. Decided April 18, 1985. Christopher Young, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Jeffrey L. Cutler, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent. On Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Before GOODWIN, REINHARDT and WIGGINS, Circuit Judges. WIGGINS, Circuit Judge: The National Labor Relations Board (the Board) invokes our jurisdiction under Section 10(e) of the National Labor Relations Act (the Act), 29 U.S.C
N.L.R.B. v. Intern. Broth. of Elec. Workers
714 F.2d 870 (9th Cir. 1980) Cited 4 timesNo. 78-3111. June 25, 1980. As Amended on Denial of Rehearing December 8, 1980. William M. Bernstein, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Michael E. de Grasse, Critchlow, Williams, Ryals Schuster, Richland, Wash., for respondent. Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Before MERRILL and FARRIS, Circuit Judges, and BONSAL, District Judge. Honorable Dudley B. Bonsal, United States Senior District Judge for the Southern District of New York, sitting by designation
Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy
29 U.S.C. § 151 Cited 5,092 times 34 Legal AnalysesFinding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"