§

Sanitation Salvage Corp.

342 N.L.R.B. 449 (N.L.R.B. 2004)
Sanitation Salvage Corp.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Strong

    393 U.S. 357 (1969)   Cited 115 times
    Explaining that, though broad, the NLRA's grant of remedial power "does not authorize punitive measures"

  2. 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.

  3. Ariz. Laborers Etc. v. Conquer Cartage Co.

    753 F.2d 1512 (9th Cir. 1985)   Cited 91 times
    Noting that me-too agreements permit independent employers "to obtain all the benefits of the master [CBA] that is negotiated by the principal employers in the industry"—including "whatever protections or advantages the industry [CBA] provides other employers"—"without having to participate in the industry negotiations, or to engage in separate negotiations, every few years"

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Donkin's Inn, Inc.

    532 F.2d 138 (9th Cir. 1976)   Cited 41 times

    No. 74-3252. March 4, 1976. Rehearing Denied April 28, 1976. Edmund Cooke, Atty. (argued), NLRB, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Robert S. Rose (argued), of Harris Aranda, Marina Del Rey, Cal., for respondent. Before CHAMBERS, TRASK and WALLACE, Circuit Judges. OPINION TRASK, Circuit Judge: This is an application for Enforcement of an Order of the NLRB, issued on October 9, 1974, against Donkin's Inn, Inc. (hereafter, "the Company") for certain violations of sections 8(a)(5) and 8(a)(1) of the

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Beckham, Inc.

    564 F.2d 190 (5th Cir. 1977)   Cited 24 times
    Analyzing apparent authority from viewpoint of union

  6. Sun Shipbuilding Dry Dock v. United States

    393 F.2d 807 (Fed. Cir. 1968)   Cited 20 times

    No. 169-65. April 19, 1968. Richard W. Kurrus, Washington, D.C., attorney of record, for plaintiff. Kurrus Jacobi, of counsel. Harvey M. Katz, Washington, D.C., with whom was Asst. Atty. Gen. Edwin L. Weisl, Jr., for defendant. Franklin G. Hunt, New York City, attorney of record, for intervenor-third-party defendant, Lord, Day Lord, New York City, of counsel. Before COWEN, Chief Judge, and LARAMORE, DURFEE, DAVIS, COLLINS, SKELTON and NICHOLS, Judges. SKELTON, Judge. The plaintiff, Sun Shipbuilding

  7. Buffalo Bituminous, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    564 F.2d 267 (8th Cir. 1977)   Cited 3 times

    No. 77-1001. Submitted September 14, 1977. Decided November 4, 1977. David R. Hols, Felhaber, Larson, Fenlon Vaogt, St. Paul, Minn., made argument, filed appearance and appendix and brief, and made rebuttal, for petitioner. Arnold Podgorsky, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (argued), and Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C. (on brief), for respondent; John S. Irving, Gen. Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel, Carl L. Taylor, Associate, Gen. Counsel, and N

  8. 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

  9. Rule 901 - Authenticating or Identifying Evidence

    Fed. R. Evid. 901   Cited 5,322 times   53 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]estimony that a matter is what it is claimed to be" is sufficient authentication