Miller Trucking Service, Inc.

26 Cited authorities

John Wiley Sons v. Livingston
376 U.S. 543 (1964) Cited 1,771 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that a court should decide whether an arbitration agreement survived a corporate merger and bound the resulting corporation
Fibreboard Corp. v. Labor Board
379 U.S. 203 (1964) Cited 731 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA
Labor Board v. Seven-Up Co.
344 U.S. 344 (1953) Cited 368 times
Upholding the Board's application of a back pay remedy different from that previously imposed in similar cases, despite no announcement of new remedial rule in rulemaking proceeding
Textile Workers v. Darlington Co.
380 U.S. 263 (1965) Cited 168 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer has the absolute right, at least as far as the NLRA is concerned, to terminate his entire business for any reason
Labor Board v. Deena Artware
361 U.S. 398 (1960) Cited 139 times
Ruling that derivative liability could be imposed on the basis of single employer status
Southport Pet., Co. v. N.L.R.B
315 U.S. 100 (1942) Cited 187 times
Ruling that dissolution of company and transfer of assets did not prevent enforcement of a Board order
Mine Workers v. Arkansas Flooring Co.
351 U.S. 62 (1956) Cited 79 times
In United Mine Workers v. Arkansas Oak Flooring Co., 351 U.S. 62, 76 S.Ct. 559, 100 L. Ed. 941, references to postlegislative history were referred to in the opinion of the Court.
Joy Silk Mills v. National Labor Rel. Board
185 F.2d 732 (D.C. Cir. 1950) Cited 162 times 2 Legal Analyses
In Joy Silk the Court held that when an employer could have no doubt as to the majority status or when an employer refuses recognition of a union "due to a desire to gain time and to take action to dissipate the union's majority, the refusal is no longer justifiable and constitutes a violation of the duty to bargain set forth in section 8(a)(5) of the Act".
N.L.R.B. v. Flomatic Corporation
347 F.2d 74 (2d Cir. 1965) Cited 50 times
In NLRB v. Flomatic Corp., 347 F.2d 74, 76-77 (2 Cir. 1965), this court held that various promises of benefits and an invitation to deal directly with the company violated § 8(a)(1).
Amalgamated Clothing Wrks. of Am. v. N.L.R.B
371 F.2d 740 (D.C. Cir. 1966) Cited 29 times
Considering employer's "lack of disavowal" of individual's actions

Miller Trucking Service, Inc.

26 Cited authorities

Holding that a court should decide whether an arbitration agreement survived a corporate merger and bound the resulting corporation

Holding that the "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA

Upholding the Board's application of a back pay remedy different from that previously imposed in similar cases, despite no announcement of new remedial rule in rulemaking proceeding

Holding that an employer has the absolute right, at least as far as the NLRA is concerned, to terminate his entire business for any reason

Ruling that derivative liability could be imposed on the basis of single employer status

Ruling that dissolution of company and transfer of assets did not prevent enforcement of a Board order

In United Mine Workers v. Arkansas Oak Flooring Co., 351 U.S. 62, 76 S.Ct. 559, 100 L. Ed. 941, references to postlegislative history were referred to in the opinion of the Court.

In NLRB v. Flomatic Corp., 347 F.2d 74, 76-77 (2 Cir. 1965), this court held that various promises of benefits and an invitation to deal directly with the company violated § 8(a)(1).

Considering employer's "lack of disavowal" of individual's actions