Proctor & Gamble Mfg., Co.

7 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Strong
393 U.S. 357 (1969) Cited 116 times
Explaining that, though broad, the NLRA's grant of remedial power "does not authorize punitive measures"
H.J. Heinz Co. v. Labor Board
311 U.S. 514 (1941) Cited 241 times 1 Legal Analyses
In H.J. Heinz Co. v. N.L.R.B., 311 U.S. 514, 61 S.Ct. 320, 85 L.Ed. 309 and Cox v. Gatliff Coal Co., D.C., 59 F. Supp. 882, affirmed 6 Cir., 152 F.2d 52, it was stated that the Act contemplated that a collective bargaining agreement be in writing.
N.L.R.B. v. Florida Medical Ctr., Inc.
576 F.2d 666 (5th Cir. 1978) Cited 34 times
In NLRB v. Florida Medical Center Inc., 576 F.2d 666, 674 (5th Cir. 1978), the court pointed out that when the Board does not accept the findings of the ALJ, the reviewing court has an obligation to examine the evidence and findings of the Board more critically than it would if the Board and the ALJ were in agreement.
Standard Oil Company v. N.L.R.B
322 F.2d 40 (6th Cir. 1963) Cited 22 times
In Standard Oil Co. v. NLRB, 322 F.2d 40 (6th Cir. 1963), four oil refineries of the same company constituted separate bargaining units; one was represented by an international union and the other three by locals thereof.
N.L.R.B. v. Indiana Mich. Elec. Co.
599 F.2d 185 (7th Cir. 1979) Cited 6 times
Holding that the Board could "reasonably conclude that any economic hardship or managerial disruption suffered by the Company" in allowing an employee unpaid time off to attend negotiations "is manifestly less than that recognized by the Company from sick leave and vacation time for employees arrived at through collective bargaining"
Minnesota Mining and Mfg. Co. v. N.L.R.B
415 F.2d 174 (8th Cir. 1969) Cited 12 times
No. 19508. September 4, 1969. Thomas M. Vogt, of Felhaber, Larson, Fenlon Vogt, St. Paul, Minn., for petitioner, Thomas J. Scheuerman, St. Paul, Minn., on the briefs. John I. Taylor, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent, Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Michael N. Sohn, Atty., N.L.R.B., on the brief. Before VOGEL, MATTHES and BRIGHT, Circuit Judges. BRIGHT, Circuit Judge. In this proceeding, the National
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Warehousemen's Union Local 17, International Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union
451 F.2d 1240 (9th Cir. 1971) Cited 6 times
Upholding Board remedial order requiring union to make employer whole for financial expenditures made by employer as result of an unlawfully coerced collective bargaining agreement

Proctor & Gamble Mfg., Co.

7 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Strong

Explaining that, though broad, the NLRA's grant of remedial power "does not authorize punitive measures"

H.J. Heinz Co. v. Labor Board

In H.J. Heinz Co. v. N.L.R.B., 311 U.S. 514, 61 S.Ct. 320, 85 L.Ed. 309 and Cox v. Gatliff Coal Co., D.C., 59 F. Supp. 882, affirmed 6 Cir., 152 F.2d 52, it was stated that the Act contemplated that a collective bargaining agreement be in writing.

N.L.R.B. v. Florida Medical Ctr., Inc.

Standard Oil Company v. N.L.R.B

In Standard Oil Co. v. NLRB, 322 F.2d 40 (6th Cir. 1963), four oil refineries of the same company constituted separate bargaining units; one was represented by an international union and the other three by locals thereof.

N.L.R.B. v. Indiana Mich. Elec. Co.

Minnesota Mining and Mfg. Co. v. N.L.R.B

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Warehousemen's Union Local 17, International Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union

Upholding Board remedial order requiring union to make employer whole for financial expenditures made by employer as result of an unlawfully coerced collective bargaining agreement