§

Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.

160 N.L.R.B. 1729 (N.L.R.B. 1966)
Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.

26 Cited authorities

  1. 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.

  2. 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".

  3. Jas. H. Matthews Co. v. N.L.R.B

    354 F.2d 432 (8th Cir. 1966)   Cited 54 times
    In James H. Matthews Co., supra, the employee in question signed an authorization card. Later the union received a letter, postmarked 11 days after the effective date for determining majority status of the union, requesting return of the employee's authorization card. Allegedly, the letter was neither written, dated, nor addressed by the employee and was originally left with an undisclosed person.

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Cumberland Shoe Corporation

    351 F.2d 917 (6th Cir. 1965)   Cited 49 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Cumberland we emphasized that "In no instance did any employee testify that he was told that the election was the only purpose of the card."

  5. Colson Corporation v. N.L.R.B

    347 F.2d 128 (8th Cir. 1965)   Cited 35 times
    Finding that a repudiation three weeks after unlawful conduct was inadequate

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Melrose Processing Co.

    351 F.2d 693 (8th Cir. 1965)   Cited 33 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Melrose Processing Co., 8 Cir., 351 F.2d 693, also decided since this case was submitted, this court stated that if the factual conclusion of the Board is based upon substantial evidence on the whole record, this court must accept such factual determination as binding. Jas. H. Matthews Co. v. N.L.R.B., 8 Cir., 354 F.2d 432, decided December 29, 1965, adheres to these principles.

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Philamon Laboratories, Inc.

    298 F.2d 176 (2d Cir. 1962)   Cited 32 times

    No. 122, Docket 27028. Argued December 6, 1961. Decided January 17, 1962. William J. Avrutis, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board (Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Asso. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel and Samuel M. Singer, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, on the brief), for petitioner. Sanford H. Markham, New York City, for respondent. Before MEDINA, SMITH and MARSHALL, Circuit Judges. MARSHALL, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations

  8. Frito Company, Western Division v. N.L.R.B

    330 F.2d 458 (9th Cir. 1964)   Cited 26 times

    Nos. 18350, 18400. April 7, 1964. Hill, Farrer Burrill and Ray L. Johnson, Jr., Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner Frito Co. Daniel R. Thompson, Washington, D.C., for amicus curiae American Bottlers of Carbonated Beverages (No. 18350). Hill, Farrer Burrill, Carl M. Gould, and Stanley E. Tobin, Los Angeles, Cal., for amicus curiae American Research Merchandising Institute (No. 18350). Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Gotham Shoe Manufacturing Co.

    359 F.2d 684 (2d Cir. 1966)   Cited 21 times

    No. 121, Docket 29793. Argued November 3, 1965. Decided January 14, 1966. Harold B. Shore, Atty., National Labor Relations Board (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel and Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Samuel K. Levene, Binghamton, N.Y. (David Levene, Levene, Gouldin Thompson, Binghamton, N.Y., of counsel), for respondent. Before KAUFMAN and HAYS, Circuit

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Security Plating Company

    356 F.2d 725 (9th Cir. 1966)   Cited 17 times

    No. 19702. February 15, 1966. Rehearing Denied March 25, 1966. Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Gary Green, Paul M. Thompson, Attys., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Richard A. Perkins, Beverly Hills, Cal., for respondent. Before BARNES and KOELSCH, Circuit Judges, and CRAIG, District Judge. KOELSCH, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board has petitioned this court to enforce its order issued against