Schnell Tool & Die Corp.

34 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 710 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. Garment Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 731 (1961)   Cited 213 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support
  3. Labor Board v. American Ins. Co.

    343 U.S. 395 (1952)   Cited 269 times
    Holding the degree of discretion in a CBA "is an issue for determination across the bargaining table, not by the Board"
  4. Labor Board v. Electrical Workers

    346 U.S. 464 (1953)   Cited 125 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Upholding discharge where employees publicly disparaged quality of employer's product, with no discernible relationship to pending labor dispute
  5. Labor Board v. Stowe Spinning Co.

    336 U.S. 226 (1949)   Cited 46 times
    In NLRB v. Stowe Spinning Co., 336 U.S. 226, 232-33, 69 S.Ct. 541, 544, 93 L.Ed. 638 (1949), the Court declined to enforce an order requiring an employer to make its meeting hall available to a union; the Board might legitimately bar discrimination against unions, the Court said, but could not require the employer to prefer unions over other potential users.
  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Reed Prince MFG

    205 F.2d 131 (1st Cir. 1953)   Cited 118 times
    In Reed Prince, supra, this court affirmed the Board's finding of refusal to bargain in good faith only "[a]fter an attentive review of the entire record of the bargaining negotiations."
  7. N.L.R.B. v. Herman Sausage Co

    275 F.2d 229 (5th Cir. 1960)   Cited 79 times
    In NLRB v. Herman Sausage Co., 275 F.2d 229 (5th Cir. 1960), our circuit held that "generally speaking, the freedom to grant a unilateral wage increase "is limited to cases where there has been a bona fide but unsuccessful attempt to reach an agreement with the union, or where the union bears the guilt for having broken off relations.' NLRB v. Andrew Jergens Co., 9 Cir., 1949, 175 F.2d 130, 136, cert. denied, 338 U.S. 827, 70 S.Ct. 76, 94 L.Ed. 503.
  8. N.L.R.B. v. Tex-Tan, Inc.

    318 F.2d 472 (5th Cir. 1963)   Cited 45 times
    In NLRB v. Tex-tan, Inc., 318 F.2d 472, 478 (5th Cir. 1972), the Fifth Circuit found that the union's demand that records be provided in a "organized fashion" was unreasonable and that the company's "unqualified offer" to "see and copy any of its records" met the union's rights to be provided with information.
  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co.

    130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942)   Cited 69 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In NLRB v. Peter Cailler Kohler Swiss Chocolates Co., 130 F.2d 503 (2d Cir. 1942), Judge Learned Hand stated his view of the type of activity protected by section 7.
  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Cambria Clay Prod

    215 F.2d 48 (6th Cir. 1954)   Cited 35 times

    No. 12072. July 7, 1954. Frederick U. Reel, Washington, D.C. (George J. Bott, David P. Findling, A. Norman Somers, Frederick U. Reel, Thomas R. Haley, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. J. Mack Swigert, Cincinnati, Ohio (J. Mack Swigert, Charles D. Lindberg, Cincinnati, Ohio, on the brief; Miller, Searl Fitch, Portsmouth, Ohio, of counsel), for respondent. Before McALLISTER and MILLER, Circuit Judges, and GOURLEY, District Judge. McALLISTER, Circuit Judge. The National Labor