11 Cited authorities
Detroit Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
440 U.S. 301 (1979) Cited 227 times 20 Legal AnalysesHolding that NLRB erred in requiring employer to disclose performance test scores of employees as information for collective bargaining, regardless of employee consent, because of the sensitive nature of the test scores
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.
385 U.S. 432 (1967) Cited 265 times 4 Legal AnalysesApproving "discovery-type standard"
Labor Board v. Borg-Warner Corp.
356 U.S. 342 (1958) Cited 296 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding employer's insistence on a ballot clause was an unfair labor practice under § 8 because it was a non-mandatory subject of bargaining and it "substantially modifies the collective-bargaining system provided for in the statute by weakening the independence of the 'representative' chosen by the employees. It enables the employer, in effect, to deal with its employees rather than with their statutory representative."
Labor Board v. Truitt Mfg. Co.
351 U.S. 149 (1956) Cited 223 times 8 Legal AnalysesHolding that the duty to produce information relevant to a bargaining issue is derivative from the broader statutory duty to bargain in good-faith
San Diego Newspaper Guild, Etc. v. N.L.R.B
548 F.2d 863 (9th Cir. 1977) Cited 50 timesRejecting a union's claim for information when the CBA was not up for renewal for two years and there was no evidence of contract negotiations
Curtiss-Wright, Wright Aero. Div. v. N.L.R.B
347 F.2d 61 (3d Cir. 1965) Cited 55 timesNoting the Board has "considerable leeway in amplifying or expanding certain details not specifically set forth in the complaint if they accord with the general substance of the complaint"
Timken Roller Bearing Company v. N.L.R.B
325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963) Cited 56 timesIn Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. NLRB, 325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 971, 84 S.Ct. 1135, 12 L.Ed.2d 85 (1964), the court considered a union request for information concerning five grievances that awaited hearings before a chosen arbitrator.
N.L.R.B. v. Rockwell-Standard, Trans. Axle
410 F.2d 953 (6th Cir. 1969) Cited 44 timesNo. 18651. May 29, 1969. Leonard M. Wagman, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner, Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Neal J. Conway, Atty., Washington, D.C., on brief. Leonard L. Scheinholtz, Pittsburgh, Pa., for respondent, Jonathan L. Alder, Reed, Smith, Shaw McClay, Pittsburgh, Pa., on brief. Before PHILLIPS, EDWARDS and PECK, Circuit Judges. Judge Edwards took no part in the consideration of decision of this case
Procter Gamble Mfg. Co. v. N.L.R.B
603 F.2d 1310 (8th Cir. 1979) Cited 17 timesNo. 78-1716. Submitted March 12, 1979. Decided August 23, 1979. Harold S. Freeman of Dinsmore, Shohl, Coates Deupree, Cincinnati, Ohio, argued and Michael S. Glassman, Cincinnati, Ohio, on appendix and briefs, for petitioner. Edward S. Dorsey, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. argued, and Andrew E. Tranovich, Atty., John S. Irving, Gen. Counsel; John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel; Robert E. Allen, Acting Assoc. Gen. Counsel; and Elliott Moore, Deputy Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C.,
Press Democrat Pub. Co. v. N.L.R.B
629 F.2d 1320 (9th Cir. 1980) Cited 15 timesNos. 79-7086 to 79-7089 and 79-7158 to 79-7161. Argued and Submitted July 10, 1980. Decided October 8, 1980. James E. Boddy, Jr., Irwin Leff, San Francisco, Cal., argued, for petitioners; James C. Paras, Irwin Leff, San Francisco, Cal., on brief. W. Christian Schumann, NLRB, Washington, D.C., argued, for respondent; Elliott Moore, Washington, D.C., on brief. Petitions for Review and Cross-Applications for Enforcement of Orders of National Labor Relations Board. Before WRIGHT, KENNEDY and POOLE, Circuit
Section 159 - Representatives and elections
29 U.S.C. § 159 Cited 2,441 times 12 Legal AnalysesGranting a bargaining unit the exclusive right to represent employees in it