Retail Clerks Intl. Assn. Local 322

8 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.
388 U.S. 175 (1967) Cited 334 times
Holding that majority rule concept is at the center of federal labor policy
Labor Board v. General Motors
373 U.S. 734 (1963) Cited 190 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that termination is also the appropriate sanction for failure to pay fees under an agency-shop clause
Scofield v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
394 U.S. 423 (1969) Cited 117 times 6 Legal Analyses
Upholding union rule, enforceable by fines and expulsion, imposing limitation on immediate pay that members could receive for piecework because Court found no "impairment of statutory labor policy"
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.
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Granite State Joint Board, Textile Workers Union of America, Local 1029
409 U.S. 213 (1972) Cited 53 times
In NLRB v. Textile Workers, supra, and Machinists v. NLRB, 412 U.S. 84 (1973) (per curiam), the Court found as a corollary that unions may not fine former members who have resigned lawfully.
Booster Lodge No. 405, International Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
412 U.S. 84 (1973) Cited 35 times
Holding the court of appeals may not properly overrule a decision of the Supreme Court in order to force its reconsideration
Continental Oil Co. v. United States
184 F.2d 802 (9th Cir. 1950) Cited 30 times
Ruling that, "[i]t is elementary that objections to offered evidence must be sufficiently specific to bring their point home to the trial judge."
N.L.R.B. v. Food Fair Stores, Inc.
307 F.2d 3 (3d Cir. 1962) Cited 15 times
Affirming Board's position narrowly construing section 8 because while "the Act does not forbid the union from demanding money in addition to `periodic dues' . . . it [i]s prevented from requesting the discharge of an employee who refuse to pay the additional charge."

Retail Clerks Intl. Assn. Local 322

8 Cited authorities

Holding that majority rule concept is at the center of federal labor policy

Holding that termination is also the appropriate sanction for failure to pay fees under an agency-shop clause

Upholding union rule, enforceable by fines and expulsion, imposing limitation on immediate pay that members could receive for piecework because Court found no "impairment of statutory labor policy"

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.

In NLRB v. Textile Workers, supra, and Machinists v. NLRB, 412 U.S. 84 (1973) (per curiam), the Court found as a corollary that unions may not fine former members who have resigned lawfully.

Holding the court of appeals may not properly overrule a decision of the Supreme Court in order to force its reconsideration

Ruling that, "[i]t is elementary that objections to offered evidence must be sufficiently specific to bring their point home to the trial judge."

Affirming Board's position narrowly construing section 8 because while "the Act does not forbid the union from demanding money in addition to `periodic dues' . . . it [i]s prevented from requesting the discharge of an employee who refuse to pay the additional charge."