§

Mace Food Stores, Inc.

167 N.L.R.B. 441 (N.L.R.B. 1967)
Mace Food Stores, Inc.

5 Cited authorities

  1. Chicago Rawhide Mfg. v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

    221 F.2d 165 (7th Cir. 1955)   Cited 31 times
    In Chicago Rawhide, this Court concluded that: "[n]either mere cooperation, preference, nor possibility of control constitute unfair labor practices; and the Board may not infer conduct that is violative of the Act from conduct that is not, unless there is a substantial basis, in fact or reason, for that inference."

  2. Coppus Engineering Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    240 F.2d 564 (1st Cir. 1957)   Cited 25 times
    In Coppus we adopted the requirement of actual evidence of domination of Chicago Rawhide Mfg. Co. v. NLRB, 221 F.2d 165 (7th Cir. 1955), and found none. Chief Judge Magruder, in a concurring opinion, recognized fully that the Shop Committee may have been "a feeble instrument", 240 F.2d at 573, but that it was "not the duty of the employer nor a function of the Board to `baby' along the employees in the direction of choosing an outside union."

  3. Wayside Press v. National Labor Relations Bd.

    206 F.2d 862 (9th Cir. 1953)   Cited 28 times
    In Wayside Press, Inc., v. N.L.R.B., 9 Cir., 206 F.2d 862, we held that an employer's furnishing of facilities and assistance for the organization of an inside union does not establish employer domination of such union, unless it occurs in a setting of such manifest employer preference for the proposed independent union or hostility toward an outside union that it intrudes upon the freedom of choice which the Act was designed to secure to employees.

  4. Continental Distilling Sales Co. v. N.L.R.B

    348 F.2d 246 (7th Cir. 1965)   Cited 4 times

    Nos. 14463, 14516. June 28, 1965. Harold A. Katz, Irving M. Friedman, Glenn P. Schwartz, Chicago, James C. Paradise, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner Union. Lee A. Freeman, William L. Sharp, Sanford I. Wolff, Chicago, for Continental Distilling Sales Co., petitioner. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Melvin Pollack, Atty., N.L.R.B., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before DUFFY, KNOCH and KILEY, Circuit Judges. DUFFY

  5. Kimbrell v. N.L.R.B

    290 F.2d 799 (4th Cir. 1961)   Cited 7 times

    No. 8266. Argued April 3, 1961. Decided June 3, 1961. Thomas A. Evins and J. Davis Kerr, Spartanburg, S.C. (Kerr Evins, Spartanburg, S.C., on brief), for petitioners. Melvin Pollack, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, and Morton Namrow, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., on brief), for respondent. Morris P. Glushien, General