§

Saint-Gobain Abrasives, Inc.

343 N.L.R.B. 542 (N.L.R.B. 2004)
Saint-Gobain Abrasives, Inc.

7 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 712 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

  2. American Federation of Television & Radio Artists v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    395 F.2d 622 (D.C. Cir. 1968)   Cited 103 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Applying Taft

  3. Huck Mfg. Co. v. NLRB

    693 F.2d 1176 (5th Cir. 1983)   Cited 29 times
    Finding of no impasse supported by fact that "Union's chief negotiator testified that he never felt the parties were at an impasse"

  4. Adair Standish Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    912 F.2d 854 (6th Cir. 1990)   Cited 17 times
    Holding that the employer violated the Act by instituting changes in the employees' schedules following the union's certification

  5. Ciba-Geigy Pharmaceuticals Div. v. N.L.R.B

    722 F.2d 1120 (3d Cir. 1983)   Cited 17 times
    In Ciba-Geigy Pharmaceuticals Division v. NLRB, 722 F.2d 1120 (3d Cir. 1983), the court rejected an argument that an "extracontractual residual rights" theory allowed imposition of attendance rules.

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Mike O'Connor Chevrolet-Buick-GMC Co.

    512 F.2d 684 (8th Cir. 1975)   Cited 16 times

    No. 74-1645. Submitted February 13, 1975. Decided March 18, 1975. Charles A. Shaw, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Charles Kelso, Atlanta, Ga., for respondents. Appeal from the National Labor Relations Board. Before HEANEY, Circuit Judge, and WANGELIN and NANGLE, District Judges. H. KENNETH WANGELIN and JOHN F. NANGLE, District Judges, Eastern District of Missouri, sitting by designation. HEANEY, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ogle Protection Service, Inc.

    444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971)   Cited 3 times   3 Legal Analyses

    No. 21049. June 30, 1971. Stanley R. Zirkin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Stanley R. Zirkin, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Douglas C. Dahn, Detroit, Mich., for respondents; Tolleson, Burgess Mead, Robert D. Welchli, Detroit, Mich., on brief. Before CELEBREZZE, PECK and McCREE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This case is before us a second