§

Service Employees Local 680 (Leland Stanford Junior University)

232 N.L.R.B. 326 (N.L.R.B. 1977)
Service Employees Local 680 (Leland Stanford Junior University)

9 Cited authorities

  1. Motor Coach Employees v. Lockridge

    403 U.S. 274 (1971)   Cited 830 times
    Holding wrongful discharge action brought in state court precluded by pervasiveness of federal regulation in the area

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.

    388 U.S. 175 (1967)   Cited 335 times
    Holding that majority rule concept is at the center of federal labor policy

  3. Labor Board v. General Motors

    373 U.S. 734 (1963)   Cited 192 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding that termination is also the appropriate sanction for failure to pay fees under an agency-shop clause

  4. Scofield v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    394 U.S. 423 (1969)   Cited 117 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding union rule, enforceable by fines and expulsion, imposing limitation on immediate pay that members could receive for piecework because Court found no "impairment of statutory labor policy"

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Granite State Joint Board, Textile Workers Union of America, Local 1029

    409 U.S. 213 (1972)   Cited 53 times
    In NLRB v. Textile Workers, supra, and Machinists v. NLRB, 412 U.S. 84 (1973) (per curiam), the Court found as a corollary that unions may not fine former members who have resigned lawfully.

  6. Booster Lodge No. 405, International Ass'n of Machinists & Aerospace Workers v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    412 U.S. 84 (1973)   Cited 35 times
    Holding the court of appeals may not properly overrule a decision of the Supreme Court in order to force its reconsideration

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Hershey Foods Corporation

    513 F.2d 1083 (9th Cir. 1975)   Cited 21 times

    No. 74-2114. April 15, 1975. Elliott Moore, Deputy Assoc. Gen. Counsel, NLRB, Joseph E. Mayer, Atty., William R. Stewart, Atty. (argued), Washington, D. C., for petitioner. Duane B. Beeson, San Francisco, Cal. (argued), for respondent. George J. Tichy, II, San Francisco, for intervenor. Before CARTER, WRIGHT and WALLACE, Circuit Judges. OPINION WALLACE, Circuit Judge: The National Labor Relations Board brought this action to enforce its orders against Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen Helpers Union

  8. Union Starch Ref. v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

    186 F.2d 1008 (7th Cir. 1951)   Cited 51 times
    In Union Starch, the employees had tendered dues and an initiation fee but were denied membership in the union for refusal to file union application forms, attend a union meeting or take the union oath.

  9. Local 749, Int. Bro. of Boilermakers, v. NLRB

    466 F.2d 343 (D.C. Cir. 1972)   Cited 6 times

    No. 71-2006. June 30, 1972. Rehearing Denied August 16, 1972. Messrs. Charles P. Scully and Donald C. Carroll, San Francisco, Cal., were on the brief for petitioner. Messrs. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Joseph E. Mayer and William H. DuRoss, III, Attys., N.L.R.B., were on the brief for respondent. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before McGOWAN, LEVENTHAL and MacKINNON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Petitioner Union challenges the National Labor Relations