§

Miramar Charterhouse

144 N.L.R.B. 728 (N.L.R.B. 1963)
Miramar Charterhouse

10 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 710 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

  2. Labor Board v. Insurance Agents

    361 U.S. 477 (1960)   Cited 324 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, subject to the duty to bargain in good faith, "parties should have wide latitude in their negotiations"

  3. 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

  4. Garment Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 731 (1961)   Cited 213 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support

  5. Labor Board v. American Ins. Co.

    343 U.S. 395 (1952)   Cited 269 times
    Holding the degree of discretion in a CBA "is an issue for determination across the bargaining table, not by the Board"

  6. Medo Photo Supply Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    321 U.S. 678 (1944)   Cited 269 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that offers of benefits to union supporters that induce them to leave the union violate § 8

  7. Labor Board v. Drivers Local Union

    362 U.S. 274 (1960)   Cited 109 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In NLRB v. Drivers Local 639, 362 U.S. 274 (1960), the Court held that § 8(b)(1)(A) was "a grant of power to the Board limited to authority to proceed against union tactics involving violence, intimidation, and reprisal or threats thereof."

  8. Labor Board v. Cabot Carbon Co.

    360 U.S. 203 (1959)   Cited 57 times
    Concluding that "dealing with" as used in 29 U.S.C. § 152 is a "broad term" and is not synonymous to "bargaining with"

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Sklar

    316 F.2d 145 (6th Cir. 1963)   Cited 15 times

    No. 15016. April 22, 1963. Elliott Moore, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Melvin J. Welles, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Stanley Gelfund, Detroit, Mich., for Sklar Gelfund, d/b/a Michigan Advertising Distributing Co. Sheldon L. Klimist, Detroit, Mich. (Zwerdling, Miller, Klimist Maurer, A.L. Zwerdling, Detroit, Mich., on the brief; Van Arkel Kaiser, Washington

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Harris-Woodson Co.

    179 F.2d 720 (4th Cir. 1950)   Cited 18 times
    In NLRB v. Harris-Woodson Co., 179 F.2d 720 (4th Cir. 1950), and Continental Oil Co. v. NLRB, 113 F.2d 473 (10th Cir. 1940), the court simply agreed with the Board's judgment, which presumably had support in the record, that the identity of the bargaining representative was preserved after affiliation.