§

Port Everglades Towing Co., Ltd.

134 N.L.R.B. 795 (N.L.R.B. 1961)
Port Everglades Towing Co., Ltd.

8 Cited authorities

  1. Medo Photo Supply Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    321 U.S. 678 (1944)   Cited 269 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that offers of benefits to union supporters that induce them to leave the union violate § 8

  2. 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.

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Textile Mach. Works

    214 F.2d 929 (3d Cir. 1954)   Cited 35 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Textile Machine Works, Inc., 1954, 214 F.2d 929 this court held that a complaint against Textile, alleging violations by it of Section 8(a)(1), (3), 29 U.S.C.A. § 158(a)(1), (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, was barred by the time limitation imposed by Section 10(b), 29 U.S.C.A. § 160(b), where workers had requested reinstatement rather than employment as new employees.

  4. Tampa Times Co. v. National Labor Rel. Board

    193 F.2d 582 (5th Cir. 1952)   Cited 30 times
    Noting the presence of uncontradicted testimony in the record that persons responsible for plaintiff's discharge were unaware of his union activities, and concluding that the "inference that he was discharged on account of such activities may not be drawn merely from the fact that the activities preceded the discharge"

  5. Great Southern Trucking Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    127 F.2d 180 (4th Cir. 1942)   Cited 35 times
    In Great Southern Trucking Co. v. National Labor Relations Board, 4 Cir., 127 F.2d 180, 185, we said: "An employer may not have a mind `hermetically sealed' against the acceptance of the proper procedure of collective bargaining in good faith; nor may an employer engage in such Fabian tactics as will practically render abortive the statutory rights of the employees."

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Chambers Manufacturing Corporation

    278 F.2d 715 (5th Cir. 1960)   Cited 10 times

    No. 18127. May 31, 1960. Jerome L. Avedon, Atty., Thomas J. McDermott, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Fannie M. Boyls, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. George P. Ryan, Alan T. Nolan, Indianapolis, Ind., Frederick A. Kullman, New Orleans, La., Kullman Lang, New Orleans, La., and Ross, McCord, Ice Miller, Indianapolis, Ind., of counsel, for respondent

  7. National Labor Rel. Board v. Dalton Tel. Co.

    187 F.2d 811 (5th Cir. 1951)   Cited 14 times
    In Dalton Telephone, however, the court strongly suggested that the company's insistence on the union registration was simply a ploy to avoid reducing to writing an agreement to which the parties had already agreed.

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Traders Oil Company of Houston

    263 F.2d 835 (5th Cir. 1959)

    No. 17381. February 13, 1959. Rehearing Denied April 22, 1959. Melvin J. Wells, Atty., Thomas J. McDermott, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Jerome D. Fenton, Gen. Counsel, Owsley Vose, Morris A. Solomon, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. H. Fletcher Brown, Raymond W. King, Houston, Tex., for respondent, Traders Oil Co. of Houston. Before RIVES, CAMERON and WISDOM, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. We find that the holdings of the Labor Board that Respondent