Joseph C. Collins & Co., Inc.

6 Cited authorities

H.J. Heinz Co. v. Labor Board
311 U.S. 514 (1941) Cited 241 times 1 Legal Analyses
In H.J. Heinz Co. v. N.L.R.B., 311 U.S. 514, 61 S.Ct. 320, 85 L.Ed. 309 and Cox v. Gatliff Coal Co., D.C., 59 F. Supp. 882, affirmed 6 Cir., 152 F.2d 52, it was stated that the Act contemplated that a collective bargaining agreement be in writing.
N.L.R.B. v. Sheridan Creations, Inc.
357 F.2d 245 (2d Cir. 1966) Cited 44 times
In NLRB v. Sheridan Creations, Inc., 357 F.2d 245 (2d Cir. 1966), cert. denied 385 U.S. 1005, 87 S.Ct. 711, 17 L.Ed.2d 544 (1967), the employer contended that its attempted withdrawal from the multi-employer bargaining unit was authorized because three of its four employees desired not to be represented by the union.
N.L.R.B. v. Spun-Jee Corporation
385 F.2d 379 (2d Cir. 1967) Cited 25 times
In N.L.R.B. v. Spun-Jee Corporation, 385 F.2d 379 (2d Cir.), it was found that the union was clearly put on notice of the intended shutdown of the plant and its removal to a different state and that the union had thus waived its right to bargain.
N.L.R.B. v. John J. Corbett Press, Inc.
401 F.2d 673 (2d Cir. 1968) Cited 21 times
No. 80, Docket 32186. Argued October 1, 1968. Decided October 17, 1968. Elliott Moore, Washington, D.C. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel), for petitioner. Robert I. Berdon, New Haven, Conn. (Berdon, Berdon Young, New Haven, Conn., David D. Berdon, Pasquale Young, New Haven, Conn., on the brief), for respondent. Before SMITH, KAUFMAN and HAYS, Circuit Judges. HAYS, Circuit Judge: The Board seeks enforcement of an order
Universal Insulation Corporation v. N.L.R.B
361 F.2d 406 (6th Cir. 1966) Cited 12 times
In Universal Insulation v. NLRB, 361 F.2d 406 (6th Cir. 1967), we held that under the special facts of that case one employer's attempt to withdraw from a multi-employer unit, after that unit had begun bargaining and had arrived at a contract with a union, was untimely.
N.L.R.B. v. Paskesz
405 F.2d 1201 (2d Cir. 1969) Cited 6 times
Affirming the Board's refusal "to recognize any significant distinction between . . . a suspension [from the multiemployer bargaining unit] and a voluntary withdrawal."

Joseph C. Collins & Co., Inc.

6 Cited authorities

H.J. Heinz Co. v. Labor Board

In H.J. Heinz Co. v. N.L.R.B., 311 U.S. 514, 61 S.Ct. 320, 85 L.Ed. 309 and Cox v. Gatliff Coal Co., D.C., 59 F. Supp. 882, affirmed 6 Cir., 152 F.2d 52, it was stated that the Act contemplated that a collective bargaining agreement be in writing.

N.L.R.B. v. Sheridan Creations, Inc.

N.L.R.B. v. Spun-Jee Corporation

In N.L.R.B. v. Spun-Jee Corporation, 385 F.2d 379 (2d Cir.), it was found that the union was clearly put on notice of the intended shutdown of the plant and its removal to a different state and that the union had thus waived its right to bargain.

N.L.R.B. v. John J. Corbett Press, Inc.

Universal Insulation Corporation v. N.L.R.B

In Universal Insulation v. NLRB, 361 F.2d 406 (6th Cir. 1967), we held that under the special facts of that case one employer's attempt to withdraw from a multi-employer unit, after that unit had begun bargaining and had arrived at a contract with a union, was untimely.

N.L.R.B. v. Paskesz

Affirming the Board's refusal "to recognize any significant distinction between . . . a suspension [from the multiemployer bargaining unit] and a voluntary withdrawal."