§
Shell Oil Co.

10 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 712 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. 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

  3. Labor Board v. Crompton Mills

    337 U.S. 217 (1949)   Cited 102 times
    Holding unlawful unilateral changes significantly different from "any which the employer has proposed" during bargaining

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bradley Washfountain

    192 F.2d 144 (7th Cir. 1951)   Cited 55 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Bradley Washfountain Co., 7 Cir., 192 F.2d 144, 152, 153, we explicitly stated: "The cases involving the propriety of an employer's solicitation of individual employees, seem to fall into at least three classes.

  5. NLRB v. Item Co.

    220 F.2d 956 (5th Cir. 1955)   Cited 36 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Item Company, 220 F.2d 956 (5th Cir. 1955), this court held that an employer had no confidentiality privilege to withhold from the union relevant wage data, "which the union's own employee-members apparently refused to disclose to it."

  6. Strubbe v. Sonnenschein

    299 F.2d 185 (2d Cir. 1962)   Cited 27 times
    Noting that we are unlikely to rely on lower state court decisions if they appear to conflict with a ruling of the state’s highest court, the courts are divided on the issue, or we are "convinced by other persuasive data that the highest court of the state would decide otherwise"

  7. Town Country Manufacturing Co. v. N.L.R.B

    316 F.2d 846 (5th Cir. 1963)   Cited 22 times
    In Town Country Manufacturing Co. v. NLRB, 316 F.2d 846 (5th Cir. 1963), this Court held that a company which contracted out work in part to rid itself of a union violated the NLRA, 29 U.S.C. § 158 et seq.

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Yawman & Erbe Mfg. Co.

    187 F.2d 947 (2d Cir. 1951)   Cited 34 times

    No. 107, Docket 21789. Argued February 7, 1951. Decided March 28, 1951. George J. Bott, General Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. General Counsel, Frederick U. Reel and Raymond M. Norton, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, all of Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Nixon, Hargrave, Middleton Devans, Rochester, N.Y., for respondent; Arthur L. Stern and William H. Morris, Rochester, N Y, of counsel. Before L. HAND, Chief Judge, and SWAN and FRANK,

  9. Simmons, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    315 F.2d 143 (1st Cir. 1963)   Cited 6 times

    No. 5950. March 21, 1963. Eduardo Negron Rodriguez, San Juan, P.R., with whom Fiddler, Gonzalez Rodriguez, San Juan, P.R., was on brief, for petitioner. Melvin J. Welles, Washington, D.C., Attorney, with whom Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Gary Green, Washington, D.C., Atty., were on brief, for respondent. Before WOODBURY, Chief Judge, and MARIS and ALDRICH, Circuit Judges. Sitting by designation. ALDRICH, Circuit

  10. McQuay-Norris Mfg. Co. v. Natl. Labor R. Board

    116 F.2d 748 (7th Cir. 1940)   Cited 29 times

    No. 7269. December 23, 1940. Petition for Review of Order of National Labor Relations Board. Proceeding by the McQuay-Norris Manufacturing Company to review an order of the National Labor Relations Board. The Board requested enforcement of its order. Request for enforcement allowed. Barnes, Hickam, Pantzer Boyd and Paul Y. Davis, all of Indianapolis, Ind. (Kurt F. Pantzer, of Indianapolis, Ind., of counsel), for petitioner. Gerhard P. Van Arkel, of Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before EVANS and