§

Park General Clinic

218 N.L.R.B. 540 (N.L.R.B. 1975)
Park General Clinic

8 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Bd. v. Washington Aluminum Co.

    370 U.S. 9 (1962)   Cited 206 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections

  2. Houston Insulation Contractors Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    386 U.S. 664 (1967)   Cited 29 times
    In Houston Insulation Contractors' Ass'n v. NLRB, 386 U.S. 664, 87 S.Ct. 1278, 18 L.Ed.2d 389 (1967), the Court, relying largely on the reasoning in National Woodwork, held that a work preservation agreement between a company and a local union could be effectuated by another local of the same union.

  3. Mushroom Transportation Company v. N.L.R.B

    330 F.2d 683 (3d Cir. 1964)   Cited 48 times
    In Mushroom Transportation Co. v. NLRB, 330 F.2d 683, 685 (3d Cir. 1964), we held that to qualify as concerted activity "it must appear at the very least that [the conduct] was engaged in with the object of initiating or inducing or preparing for group action or that it had some relation to group action in the interest of the employees."

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co.

    130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942)   Cited 69 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In NLRB v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co., 130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942), Judge Learned Hand stated his view of the type of activity protected by section 7.

  5. National Labor Rel. Board v. Baldwin L. Works

    128 F.2d 39 (3d Cir. 1942)   Cited 60 times
    Modifying and enforced an order by the Board

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Montgomery Ward

    242 F.2d 497 (2d Cir. 1957)   Cited 23 times

    No. 211, Docket 24251. Argued January 11, 1957. Decided March 18, 1957. Theophil C. Kammholtz, Gen. Counsel, Stephen Leonard, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Samuel M. Singer and Florian J. Bartosic, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Charles J. Barnhill and David L. Dickson, Chicago, Ill., and T.W. Madden, New York, N.Y., for respondent. Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and LUMBARD and WATERMAN, Circuit Judges. LUMBARD, Circuit Judge. The National Labor

  7. F.W. Woolworth Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    121 F.2d 658 (2d Cir. 1941)   Cited 36 times

    No. 276. July 2, 1941. Petition to Review and Set Aside an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Petition by F.W. Woolworth Company to review and set aside an order of the National Labor Relations Board, and request by the board to enforce its order. Petition to review the order denied, and request for enforcement of order as modified in accordance with opinion granted. Thomas I. Sheridan and Howard L. Klein, both of New York City, for petitioner. Robert B. Watts, Laurence A. Knapp, Ernest

  8. B. P. Motor Express Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    413 F.2d 1021 (7th Cir. 1969)   Cited 1 times

    No. 17045. July 24, 1969. George Gregory Mantho, Detroit, Mich., for petitioner. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before KILEY and SWYGERT, Circuit Judges, and HOFFMAN, District Judge. Judge Hoffman is sitting by designation from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. JULIUS J. HOFFMAN, District Judge. The employer, B. P. Motor Express, Inc., has petitioned for review of an order of the National Labor Relations Board, and the Board