§

Nickles Bakery Of Indiana, Inc.

296 N.L.R.B. 927 (N.L.R.B. 1989)
Nickles Bakery Of Indiana, Inc.

8 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fant Milling Co.

    360 U.S. 301 (1959)   Cited 106 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an untimely allegation of an unlawful unilateral wage increase was sufficiently related to a timely refusal-to-bargain charge, because the wage increase "largely influenced" the Board's finding that an unlawful refusal to bargain had occurred

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dinion Coil Co.

    201 F.2d 484 (2d Cir. 1952)   Cited 96 times
    Observing that "methods of evaluating the credibility of oral testimony do not lend themselves to formulations in terms of rules"

  3. Texas Industries, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    336 F.2d 128 (5th Cir. 1964)   Cited 64 times
    In Texas Industries, Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 336 F.2d 128 (5 Cir. 1964), the court held that charges filed by the Union that alleged generally that the company had "engaged in * * * unfair labor practices within the meaning of" Section 8(a)(1) and (3), and then alleged specifically various acts of coercion against a named employee was sufficient to include unfair labor practices by the company against other employees which were not mentioned in the charges.

  4. G.W. Galloway Co. v. N.L.R.B

    856 F.2d 275 (D.C. Cir. 1988)   Cited 16 times
    Requiring a "significant factual affiliation" between complaint and charge allegations

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Central Power Light Company

    425 F.2d 1318 (5th Cir. 1970)   Cited 30 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In NLRB v. Central Pwr. Light Co., 425 F.2d 1318 (5th Cir. 1970), the original charge alleged a discriminatory discharge of an employee and stated the company had violated section 7 rights "by other acts and conduct."

  6. Procter Gamble Mfg. Co. v. N.L.R.B

    658 F.2d 968 (4th Cir. 1981)   Cited 13 times
    Holding that the options available to the employer under the NLRB's remedial order — including "leeway . . . to meet evenings or weekends rather than to grant any uncompensated leave" — "demonstrate that the Board's order does not impose a new contractual provision upon the parties," but rather "serves only to remedy the unfair labor practices found in this case"

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Braswell Motor Freight Lines, Inc.

    486 F.2d 743 (7th Cir. 1973)   Cited 13 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stating "so long as the Board entered the controversy pursuant to a formal charge it may allege whatever it finds as part of that controversy."

  8. Exber, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    390 F.2d 127 (9th Cir. 1968)   Cited 3 times

    No. 21362. March 5, 1968. Fredrick N. Richman (argued), Sidney R. Korshak, David H. Mendelsohn, Chicago, Ill., for appellant. Harvey Letter (argued), Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Wayne S. Bishop, Joseph C. Thackery, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Roy O. Hoffman, Director N.L.R.B., San Francisco, Cal., for appellee. Before CHAMBERS and HAMLEY, Circuit Judges, and JAMESON, District Judge. JAMESON, District Judge: This