Munsingwear, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Erie Resistor Corp.

    373 U.S. 221 (1963)   Cited 358 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding Board decision prohibiting employer from granting super-seniority to strike-breakers because "[s]uper-seniority renders future bargaining difficult, if not impossible"
  2. Radio Officers v. Labor Board

    347 U.S. 17 (1954)   Cited 470 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he policy of the Act is to insulate employees' jobs from their organizational rights"
  3. Labor Board v. Parts Co.

    375 U.S. 405 (1964)   Cited 213 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”
  4. May Stores Co. v. Labor Board

    326 U.S. 376 (1945)   Cited 257 times
    Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"
  5. Hendrix Manufacturing Company v. N.L.R.B

    321 F.2d 100 (5th Cir. 1963)   Cited 91 times
    Permitting the Board to consider the employer's clear expression of opposition to the union as background in order to determine motivation for management's conduct
  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Whitin Mach. Works

    204 F.2d 883 (1st Cir. 1953)   Cited 57 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Whitin Machine Works, 204 F.2d 883 (1st Cir.1953), for example, an assistant supervisor in his employer's accounting department was, upon a consideration of the nature of his work, determined not to be a supervisor for purposes of litigating his discharge from employment, and, therefore, he was entitled to the protections of the National Labor Relations Act. 204 F.2d at 886.
  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Illinois Tool Works

    153 F.2d 811 (7th Cir. 1946)   Cited 47 times
    Noting that the test for violations of sec. 8, now codified as sec. 8, of the NLRA is whether "the employer engaged in conduct which, it may reasonably be said, tends to interfere with the free exercise of employee rights under the Act," and that actual or successful coercion need not be shown in order for the Board to find a violation
  8. N.L.R.B. v. Harbison-Fischer Manufacturing Co.

    304 F.2d 738 (5th Cir. 1962)   Cited 19 times

    No. 19105. June 20, 1962. Melvin Pollack, Atty., N.L.R.B., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, for petitioner. Karl Mueller, Fort Worth, Tex., Harold E. Mueller, Mueller Mueller, Fort Worth, Tex., for respondent. Before HUTCHESON, WISDOM, and BELL, Circuit Judges. GRIFFIN B. BELL, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board here seeks enforcement of its order against Harbison-Fischer

  9. Revere Camera Company v. N.L.R.B

    304 F.2d 162 (7th Cir. 1962)   Cited 19 times

    No. 13561. June 12, 1962. David H. Mendelsohn, Thomas J. Finnegan, Chicago, Ill., Sidney R. Korshak, Chicago, Ill., for petitioner. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Glen M. Bendixsen, Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Melvin J. Welles, for National Labor Relations Board. Before HASTINGS, Chief Judge, and CASTLE and SWYGERT, Circuit Judges. CASTLE, Circuit Judge. This case is before the Court pursuant to Section 10(e) and (f) of the National Labor

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Brookside Industries, Inc.

    308 F.2d 224 (4th Cir. 1962)   Cited 11 times
    Upholding Board's conclusion that directing supervisor to obtain information about union organization from her husband, statutory employee, is unfair labor practice