Mammoth of California, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

  1. Brooks v. Labor Board

    348 U.S. 96 (1954)   Cited 300 times
    Holding that an employer has a duty to bargain in good faith for one year beginning on the date of certification of the bargaining representative by the Board
  2. Franks Bros. Co. v. Labor Board

    321 U.S. 702 (1944)   Cited 252 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the legitimacy of the Board's view that the unlawful refusal to bargain collectively with employees' chosen representative disrupts employee morale, deters organizational activities, and discourages membership in unions.
  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Golden Age Beverage Co.

    415 F.2d 26 (5th Cir. 1969)   Cited 95 times
    In NLRB v. Golden Age Beverage Company, 415 F.2d 26, 30 (5th Cir. 1969), this court apparently considered hearsay evidence at this stage of proceedings to set aside an election.
  4. Follett Corporation v. N.L.R.B

    397 F.2d 91 (7th Cir. 1968)   Cited 20 times

    No. 16221. June 10, 1968. Robert C. Claus, James S. Petrie, John P. Jacoby, Chicago, Ill., Vedder, Price, Kaufman Kammholz, Chicago, Ill., of counsel, for petitioners. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, George B. Driesen, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Fred R. Kimmel, Atty., N.L.R.B., for respondent. Before CASTLE, Chief Judge, and SWYGERT and CUMMINGS, Circuit Judges. SWYGERT, Circuit Judge. Follett Corporation

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Vantran Elec. Corp.

    580 F.2d 921 (7th Cir. 1978)   Cited 8 times
    In NLRB v. Vantran Electric Corp., 580 F.2d 921, 924-25 (7th Cir. 1978), this circuit noted the distinction between formal and informal settlements.
  6. N.L.R.B. v. John S. Swift Company

    302 F.2d 342 (7th Cir. 1962)   Cited 21 times
    Excluding "the period during which the bargaining relationship was suspended by litigation of the Company's unfair labor practices"
  7. N.L.R.B. v. Burnett Construction Company

    350 F.2d 57 (10th Cir. 1965)   Cited 15 times

    No. 8039. August 6, 1965. Melvin H. Reifin, Atty., N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Warren M. Davidson, Atty., N.L.R.B., with him on the brief), for petitioner. Harold B. Wagner, Denver, Colo., for respondent. Before PHILLIPS, PICKETT and LEWIS, Circuit Judges. PICKETT, Circuit Judge. This proceeding is here on the Board's petition for enforcement of its order directing respondent to cease and desist

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Commerce Co.

    328 F.2d 600 (5th Cir. 1964)   Cited 12 times

    No. 20477. March 3, 1964. Rehearing Denied March 30, 1964. Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Dominick Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Solomon I. Hirsh, Paula Omansky, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Charles R. Vickery, Jr., Liddell, Austin, Dawson Sapp, Houston, Tex., Harley W. McConnell, Houston, Tex., for respondent. Before HUTCHESON and GRIFFIN B. BELL, Circuit Judges, and BREWSTER, District Judge. HUTCHESON, Circuit

  9. LTV Electrosystems, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    388 F.2d 683 (4th Cir. 1968)   Cited 7 times

    No. 11560. Argued January 10, 1968. Decided January 18, 1968. Knox L. Haynsworth, Jr., Greenville, S.C. (Thompson, Ogletree Haynsworth, Greenville, S.C., on brief), for petitioner. Lawrence M. Joseph, Attorney, N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel and Corinna Lothar Metcalf, Attorney, N.L.R.B., on brief), for respondent. Before BOREMAN, WINTER and BUTZNER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: LTV Electrosystems

  10. Poole Foundry Mach. v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

    192 F.2d 740 (4th Cir. 1951)   Cited 20 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Poole the court upheld the Board's bargaining order, concluding that the employer's withdrawal of recognition of the union based on a decertification petition signed by sixty-four of sixty-six employees within four months of the employer's settlement agreement with the union violated section 8(a)(1) and (5) of the Act.