§

Milk Drivers & Dairy Employees, Local Union 537

147 N.L.R.B. 230 (N.L.R.B. 1964)
Milk Drivers & Dairy Employees, Local Union 537

5 Cited authorities

  1. District No. 9 v. N.L.R.B

    315 F.2d 33 (D.C. Cir. 1962)   Cited 24 times

    No. 16901. Argued September 27, 1962. Decided November 15, 1962. Mr. Bernard Dunau, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Plato E. Papps, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Melvin J. Welles, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, of the bar of the Court of Appeals of New York, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Messrs. Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, National Labor Relations

  2. N.L.R.B. v. Local 294

    298 F.2d 105 (2d Cir. 1961)   Cited 13 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Local 294 I.B.T., 298 F.2d 105 (2nd Cir., 1961), the Court analyzed the meaning of the "employed by any person" phrase and said that the phrase does not include corporate officers, high ranking supervisors and others high up in the management heirarchy.

  3. Minnesota Milk Company v. N.L.R.B

    314 F.2d 761 (8th Cir. 1963)   Cited 7 times

    No. 16966. March 7, 1963. Thomas M. Vogt, St. Paul, Minn., made argument for petitioner; Felhaber, Larson Fenlon, St. Paul, Minn., with him on the brief. Hans J. Lehmann, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., made argument for respondent; Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Melvin J. Welles, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., with him on the brief. Donald Savelkoul, Minneapolis, Minn., made argument for intervenor and

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sterling Fur. Co.

    202 F.2d 41 (9th Cir. 1953)   Cited 4 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Sterling Furniture Co., 202 F.2d 41 (9 Cir., 1953) this Court in response to the argument of the Board that an order could not be issued against an association which had voluntarily appeared, but had not by amendment of the complaint been made a party, stated that the Board's position was not based upon considerations having to do with vindication of the policy of the Act, but on assumed procedural difficulties which had no merit in light of the Board's amendatory powers.

  5. Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy

    29 U.S.C. § 151   Cited 5,092 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"