§

Nopco Chemical Co.

160 N.L.R.B. 23 (N.L.R.B. 1966)
Nopco Chemical Co.

19 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. 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.

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Fitzgerald Mills Corporation

    313 F.2d 260 (2d Cir. 1963)   Cited 35 times

    Nos. 31, 32, 33, Dockets 27422, 27224, 27318. Argued October 11, 1962. Decided January 9, 1963. Morton Nambow, Atty., N.L.R.B. (Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Allison W. Brown, Jr., Atty., N.L.R.B., on the brief), for National Labor Relations Board. Edward Wynne, New York City (Benjamin Wyle, New York City, on the brief), for Textile Workers Union. Theodore R. Iserman, New York City (Kelley Drye Newhall Maginnes

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. S. Bleachery

    257 F.2d 235 (4th Cir. 1958)   Cited 33 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the essential inquiry is whether the employer shares the power of management

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Williams

    195 F.2d 669 (4th Cir. 1952)   Cited 23 times

    No. 6370. Argued March 6, 1952. Decided April 1, 1952. Arnold Ordman, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., and Rosanna A. Blake, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Takoma Park, Md., on the brief), for petitioner. Isadore S. Bernstein, Columbia, S.C. (Randolph Murdaugh, Hampton, S.C., and Henry H. Edens, Columbia

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Barney's Supercenter, Inc.

    296 F.2d 91 (3d Cir. 1961)   Cited 12 times

    No. 13596. Argued October 5, 1961. Decided November 16, 1961. Marion L. Griffin, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Allison W. Brown, Jr., Attys. N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Jack J. Rosenberg, Pittsburgh, Pa., for respondent. Before GOODRICH, STALEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges. STALEY, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board ("Board") seeks enforcement of an order

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Tepper

    297 F.2d 280 (10th Cir. 1961)   Cited 11 times
    Processing of milk by an employer who was primarily a processor and processed milk from other farms not included under exemption

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Ertel Manufacturing Corporation

    352 F.2d 916 (7th Cir. 1965)   Cited 6 times

    No. 15062. October 19, 1965. Rehearing Denied November 30, 1965. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Hans J. Lehmann, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Harry P. Dees, Joseph A. Yocum, Evansville, Ind., for respondent. Before HASTINGS, Chief Judge, and DUFFY and CASTLE, Circuit Judges. DUFFY, Circuit Judge. The Labor Board petitions for enforcement of its order issued against respondent and dated June 5, 1964. Respondent (Company) maintains a factory and place of business in