L. C. Cassidy & Son, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Katz
369 U.S. 736 (1962) Cited 710 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"
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"
Medo Photo Supply Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
321 U.S. 678 (1944) Cited 269 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that offers of benefits to union supporters that induce them to leave the union violate § 8
Timken Roller Bearing Company v. N.L.R.B
325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963) Cited 56 times
In Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. NLRB, 325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 971, 84 S.Ct. 1135, 12 L.Ed.2d 85 (1964), the court considered a union request for information concerning five grievances that awaited hearings before a chosen arbitrator.
Leeds Northrup Company v. N.L.R.B
391 F.2d 874 (3d Cir. 1968) Cited 31 times
In Leeds Northrup Co. v. NLRB, 391 F.2d 874 (3rd Cir. 1968), the Third Circuit enforced the Board's order requiring the company to grant backpay to union employees based on a prior compensation formula where the company had unilaterally altered the formula in violation of its duty to bargain.
Weltronic Company v. N.L.R.B
419 F.2d 1120 (6th Cir. 1969) Cited 14 times
In Weltronic we indulged the presumption that the Board's unstated reason for denying the union's motion to reopen was because the company had already filed in this Court its petition for review of the Board's order.
Armstrong Cork Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
211 F.2d 843 (5th Cir. 1954) Cited 27 times
In Armstrong Cork Co. v. NLRB, 211 F.2d 843 (5th Cir. 1954), an employer announced to an assembly of workers shortly after a representation election that he intended to remove a "pledge" which the Company had posted on the bulletin board setting forth employees' rights.
N.L.R.B. v. Perkins Machine Company
326 F.2d 488 (1st Cir. 1964) Cited 14 times
No. 6182. January 23, 1964. Peter M. Giesey, Washington, D.C., Atty., with whom Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Solomon I. Hirsh, Washington, D.C., Atty., were on brief, for petitioner. John H. Goewey, Worcester, Mass., with whom James S. Gratton and Bowditch, Gowetz Lane, Worcester, Mass., were on brief, for respondent. Before WOODBURY, Chief Judge, and HARTIGAN and ALDRICH, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. Respondent
General Telephone Company of Fla. v. N.L.R.B
337 F.2d 452 (5th Cir. 1964) Cited 10 times
No. 20866. October 2, 1964. William Terrell Hodges, Hugh C. MacFarlane and MacFarlane, Ferguson, Allison Kelly, Tampa, Fla., for petitioner. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Asso. Gen. Counsel, Stephen B. Goldberg, Atty., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Joseph C. Thackery, Attorney, N.L.R.B., for respondent. Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, WISDOM, Circuit Judge, and McRAE, District Judge. McRAE, District Judge. This case is before the Court upon petition
Peterson v. S.S. Wahcondah
331 F.2d 44 (5th Cir. 1964) Cited 8 times
No. 20684. April 8, 1964. Fernand F. Willoz, III, New Orleans, La., for appellants. Samuel C. Gainsburgh, Theodore J. Pfister, Jr., New Orleans, La., Kierr Gainsburgh, New Orleans, La., for appellee. Before RIVES, JONES and WISDOM, Circuit Judges. RIVES, Circuit Judge: Except for the Master of the vessel, who is not a party to these proceedings, the libelants, appellants, are all of the officers and crew of the "SS WAHCONDAH" at the time of its arrival at the Port of New Orleans with a cargo of two

L. C. Cassidy & Son, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

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 offers of benefits to union supporters that induce them to leave the union violate § 8

In Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. NLRB, 325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 971, 84 S.Ct. 1135, 12 L.Ed.2d 85 (1964), the court considered a union request for information concerning five grievances that awaited hearings before a chosen arbitrator.

In Leeds Northrup Co. v. NLRB, 391 F.2d 874 (3rd Cir. 1968), the Third Circuit enforced the Board's order requiring the company to grant backpay to union employees based on a prior compensation formula where the company had unilaterally altered the formula in violation of its duty to bargain.

In Weltronic we indulged the presumption that the Board's unstated reason for denying the union's motion to reopen was because the company had already filed in this Court its petition for review of the Board's order.

In Armstrong Cork Co. v. NLRB, 211 F.2d 843 (5th Cir. 1954), an employer announced to an assembly of workers shortly after a representation election that he intended to remove a "pledge" which the Company had posted on the bulletin board setting forth employees' rights.