§

Mfg. Woodworkers Assc.

326 N.L.R.B. 321 (N.L.R.B. 1998)
Mfg. Woodworkers Assc.

8 Cited authorities

  1. National Woodwork Manufacturers Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    386 U.S. 612 (1967)   Cited 392 times
    Holding that union employees' refusal to install third-party manufacturer's product was not prohibited under § 158(b)(B), because it was an action "pressuring the [union members'] employer for agreements regulating relations between [the employer] and his own employees"

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n

    447 U.S. 490 (1980)   Cited 65 times   4 Legal Analyses
    In NLRB v. Longshoremen, 447 U.S. 490 (1980) (ILA I), we reviewed the National Labor Relations Board's conclusion that the Rules and their enforcement constituted unlawful secondary activity under §§ 8(b)(4)(B) and 8(e) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b)(4) (B) and 158(e).

  3. The Ansul Co. v. Uniroyal, Inc.

    404 U.S. 1018 (1972)   Cited 54 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Nos. 71-537, 71-539. January 11, 1972, OCTOBER TERM, 1971. Facts and opinion, D.C., 301 F.Supp. 273; 306 F.Supp. 541; 448 F.2d 872. C.A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 448 F. 2d 872.

  4. Natonal Labor Relations Board v. Columbus Printing Pressmen & Assistants' Union No. 252

    543 F.2d 1161 (5th Cir. 1976)   Cited 44 times
    Holding that interest arbitration clauses "are not enforceable to perpetuate inclusion of [interest] arbitration clauses continuously in contract after contract"

  5. Iron Workers Dist. Council v. N.L.R.B

    913 F.2d 1470 (9th Cir. 1990)   Cited 14 times
    Applying Moore Dry Dock criteria to determine whether picketing on secondary employer's premises is primary or secondary

  6. Griffith Co. v. N.L.R.B

    545 F.2d 1194 (9th Cir. 1977)   Cited 21 times
    In Griffith we reviewed the NLRB's dismissal of a contractor's complaint that the Master Labor Agreement involved an unfair labor practice by requiring contractors to cease doing business with delinquent subcontractors.

  7. Joint Council of Teamsters No. 42 v. N.L.R.B

    450 F.2d 1322 (D.C. Cir. 1971)   Cited 18 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Nos. 24016, 24261. Argued March 2, 1971. Decided September 24, 1971. Mr. Paul Crost, Los Angeles, Cal., of the bar of the Supreme Court of California, pro hac vice, by special leave of Court, with whom Mr. Raymond W. Bergan, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioners in No. 24,016 and intervenors in No. 24,261. Mr. George A. Pappy, Los Angeles, Cal., also entered an appearance for petitioners in No. 24,016 and intervenors in No. 24,261. Mr. Carl W. Robertson, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner

  8. Los Angeles, L. 69 v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

    443 F.2d 1173 (9th Cir. 1971)   Cited 6 times

    No. 26534. June 7, 1971. On Petition for Review and Cross Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Stephen Reinhardt (argued), George E. Bodle, Daniel Fogel, Lester G. Ostrov, of Bodle, Fogel, Julber Reinhardt, Herbert M. Ansell, of Ansell Ansell, Duane B. Beeson, of Brundage, Neyhart, Grodin Beeson, Eugene Miller, Paul Crost, of Brundage, Neyhart, Miller, Ross Reich, Leo Geffner, of Geffner Satzman, Los Angeles, Cal., Irwin Leff, of Rosenthal Leff, Duane Beeson