Los Angeles Chemical Co.

5 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fleetwood Trailer Co.
389 U.S. 375 (1967) Cited 233 times
In Fleetwood Trailer, 389 U.S. 375, 88 S.Ct. 543, the Supreme Court was required to determine whether the employer violated the Act when it hired six new employees who had not previously worked for the company instead of six former strikers who had applied for reinstatement.
SCM Corp. v. Advance Business Systems & Supply Co.
397 U.S. 920 (1970) Cited 200 times 5 Legal Analyses
Upholding a delay of three months where only prejudice shown was that the defendants could not recall details of the days in the distant past; no special circumstances
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. International Van Lines
409 U.S. 48 (1972) Cited 71 times
Holding that a statement that striking employees "are being permanently replaced" constituted an unlawful discharge when permanent replacements had not been hired
Laidlaw Corporation v. N.L.R.B
414 F.2d 99 (7th Cir. 1969) Cited 81 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that while an employer is not obligated to discharge permanent replacements to make room for returning economic strikers, the employer must place the former strikers on a preferential recall list
Little Rock Airmotive, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
455 F.2d 163 (8th Cir. 1972) Cited 10 times
No. 20350. February 9, 1972. Charles J. Lincoln, Philip K. Lyon, Little Rock, Ark., for petitioner; House, Holmes Jewell, Little Rock, Ark., of counsel. Charles N. Steele, Atty., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Michael S. Winer, Atty., N.L.R.B., for respondent. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before MATTHES, Chief Judge, BRIGHT, Circuit Judge, and WEBSTER, District Judge. Eastern District

Los Angeles Chemical Co.

5 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fleetwood Trailer Co.

In Fleetwood Trailer, 389 U.S. 375, 88 S.Ct. 543, the Supreme Court was required to determine whether the employer violated the Act when it hired six new employees who had not previously worked for the company instead of six former strikers who had applied for reinstatement.

SCM Corp. v. Advance Business Systems & Supply Co.

Upholding a delay of three months where only prejudice shown was that the defendants could not recall details of the days in the distant past; no special circumstances

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. International Van Lines

Holding that a statement that striking employees "are being permanently replaced" constituted an unlawful discharge when permanent replacements had not been hired

Laidlaw Corporation v. N.L.R.B

Holding that while an employer is not obligated to discharge permanent replacements to make room for returning economic strikers, the employer must place the former strikers on a preferential recall list

Little Rock Airmotive, Inc. v. N.L.R.B