Sewell Manufacturing Co.

6 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.
312 U.S. 426 (1941) Cited 507 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"
Labor Board v. Mackay Co.
304 U.S. 333 (1938) Cited 535 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices
Nat. Licorice Co. v. Labor Bd.
309 U.S. 350 (1940) Cited 318 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that requiring employees to sign individual contracts waiving their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining violates § 8 of the NLRA
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.
Republic Steel Corp. v. Labor Board
311 U.S. 7 (1940) Cited 232 times 3 Legal Analyses
In Republic Steel, supra, the Court refused to enforce an order requiring the employer to pay the full amount of back pay to an employee who had been paid to work for the Work Projects Administration in the meantime.
Mine Workers v. Eagle-Picher Co.
325 U.S. 335 (1945) Cited 48 times
In Eagle-Picher the Board petitioned this court to vacate a portion of a decree dealing with back pay and to remand the case so that the Board might prescribe relief it deemed more appropriate.

Sewell Manufacturing Co.

6 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Express Pub. Co.

Holding that "the mere fact that a court has found that a defendant has committed an act in violation of a statute does not justify an injunction broadly to obey the statute"

Labor Board v. Mackay Co.

Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices

Nat. Licorice Co. v. Labor Bd.

Holding that requiring employees to sign individual contracts waiving their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining violates § 8 of the NLRA

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.

Republic Steel Corp. v. Labor Board

In Republic Steel, supra, the Court refused to enforce an order requiring the employer to pay the full amount of back pay to an employee who had been paid to work for the Work Projects Administration in the meantime.

Mine Workers v. Eagle-Picher Co.

In Eagle-Picher the Board petitioned this court to vacate a portion of a decree dealing with back pay and to remand the case so that the Board might prescribe relief it deemed more appropriate.