Schultz Painting & Decorating Co.

6 Cited authorities

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.
N.L.R.B. v. Sheridan Creations, Inc.
357 F.2d 245 (2d Cir. 1966) Cited 44 times
In NLRB v. Sheridan Creations, Inc., 357 F.2d 245 (2d Cir. 1966), cert. denied 385 U.S. 1005, 87 S.Ct. 711, 17 L.Ed.2d 544 (1967), the employer contended that its attempted withdrawal from the multi-employer bargaining unit was authorized because three of its four employees desired not to be represented by the union.
N.L.R.B. v. Herman Brothers Pet Supply, Inc.
325 F.2d 68 (6th Cir. 1963) Cited 18 times
In NLRB v. Herman Brothers Pet Supply, Inc., 325 F.2d 68 (6th Cir. 1963), there was no dispute as to the occurrence of unfair labor practices, such as the employer's statement to several employees that "he would never sign a union contract, and... he would close his business before admitting the union."
N.L.R.B. v. Jeffries Banknote Company
281 F.2d 893 (9th Cir. 1960) Cited 18 times
No. 16700. September 6, 1960. Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Duane B. Beeson, Richard J. Scupi, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., J.H. Doesburg, Jr., J.N. Goddess, Chicago, Ill., for respondent. Before ORR and HAMLIN, Circuit Judges, and EAST, District Judge. HAMLIN, Circuit Judge. Before the Court is a petition of the National Labor Relations Board for the enforcement of an order of the Board dated September
Reynolds Pallet Box Co. v. N.L.R.B
324 F.2d 833 (6th Cir. 1963) Cited 7 times
In Reynolds Pallet Box Co. v. NLRB, 324 F.2d 833 (6th Cir. 1963), the employer engaged in coercive conduct during a campaign to organize the employees and discriminatorily discharged employees because of their union activity.
N.L.R.B. v. United States Air Conditioning
302 F.2d 280 (1st Cir. 1962) Cited 8 times
In NLRB v. United States Air Conditioning Corp., 302 F.2d 280 (1st Cir. 1962), the corporate restructuring changed no management personnel but resulted in the firing of the production employees of a subsidiary, all of whom were union members.

Schultz Painting & Decorating Co.

6 Cited authorities

H.J. Heinz Co. v. Labor Board

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.

N.L.R.B. v. Sheridan Creations, Inc.

N.L.R.B. v. Herman Brothers Pet Supply, Inc.

N.L.R.B. v. Jeffries Banknote Company

Reynolds Pallet Box Co. v. N.L.R.B

In Reynolds Pallet Box Co. v. NLRB, 324 F.2d 833 (6th Cir. 1963), the employer engaged in coercive conduct during a campaign to organize the employees and discriminatorily discharged employees because of their union activity.

N.L.R.B. v. United States Air Conditioning

In NLRB v. United States Air Conditioning Corp., 302 F.2d 280 (1st Cir. 1962), the corporate restructuring changed no management personnel but resulted in the firing of the production employees of a subsidiary, all of whom were union members.