§

Safeway Stores, Inc.

99 N.L.R.B. 48 (N.L.R.B. 1952)
Safeway Stores, Inc.

24 Cited authorities

  1. I.A. of M. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 72 (1940)   Cited 318 times
    In International Ass'n of Machinists v. N.L.R.B., 1940, 311 U.S. 72, 61 S.Ct. 83, 85 L. Ed. 50, there had been a long history of management favoritism to the established and hostility to the aspiring union; and in Franks Bros. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 1944, 321 U.S. 702, 703, 64 S.Ct. 817, 818, 88 L.Ed. 1020, the employer had "conducted an aggressive campaign against the Union, even to the extent of threatening to close its factory if the union won the election."

  2. May Stores Co. v. Labor Board

    326 U.S. 376 (1945)   Cited 257 times
    Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"

  3. 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.

  4. 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.

  5. Labor Board v. Waterman S.S. Co.

    309 U.S. 206 (1940)   Cited 219 times
    Granting passes to one of two rival unions to go aboard ship to contact men

  6. Southern S.S. Co. v. Labor Board

    316 U.S. 31 (1942)   Cited 160 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding an abuse of discretion where the National Labor Relations Board sought to fulfill one congressional objective but “wholly ignore[d] other and equally important Congressional objectives”

  7. Labor Board v. Falk Corp.

    308 U.S. 453 (1940)   Cited 140 times
    In Falk, the two proceedings were held simultaneously, whereas in our case the representation case preceded the unfair labor case.

  8. N.L.R.B. v. P. Lorillard Co.

    314 U.S. 512 (1942)   Cited 76 times

    CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 71. Argued December 18, 19, 1941. Decided January 5, 1942. Whether an employer should be required to bargain with a union previously selected as employees' bargaining representative or, in view of lapse of time and changed conditions, a new election should be held is a question for decision by the Board and not by the Circuit Court of Appeals. P. 513. 117 F.2d 921, reversed. CERTIORARI, 313 U.S. 557, to review a judgment entered

  9. 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".

  10. Labor Board v. Fruehauf Co.

    301 U.S. 49 (1937)   Cited 35 times

    CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. Nos. 420 and 421. Argued February 11, 1937. Decided April 12, 1937. The National Labor Relations Act, and orders made under it by the National Labor Relations Board, sustained upon the authority of National Labor Relations Board v. Jones Laughlin Steel Corp., ante, p. 1, as applied to a manufacturer of commercial "trailers," (vehicles designed for the transportation of merchandise), having its factory in Michigan, but which obtained