§

Shop-Rite Supermarket, Inc.

231 N.L.R.B. 500 (N.L.R.B. 1977)
Shop-Rite Supermarket, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,035 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  2. Labor Board v. Parts Co.

    375 U.S. 405 (1964)   Cited 213 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. McGahey

    233 F.2d 406 (5th Cir. 1956)   Cited 133 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. McGahey, 233 F.2d 406 (5th Cir. 1956), this court described casual and moderate inquiries, even as to union preference, absent evidence indicating that the employee has reason to consider the inquiries a threat of reprisals, as not constituting an unfair labor practice in violation of § 8(a)(1).

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Flomatic Corporation

    347 F.2d 74 (2d Cir. 1965)   Cited 50 times
    In NLRB v. Flomatic Corp., 347 F.2d 74, 76-77 (2 Cir. 1965), this court held that various promises of benefits and an invitation to deal directly with the company violated § 8(a)(1).

  5. Furr's, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    381 F.2d 562 (10th Cir. 1967)   Cited 30 times

    No. 8686. February 20, 1967. Rehearing Denied March 24, 1967. Certiorari Denied October 9, 1967. See 88 S.Ct. 70. James H. Milam, Lubbock, Tex., for petitioner. Anthony J. Obadal, Washington, D.C. (Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli, Marcel Mallet-Prevost and Elliott Moore, Washington, D.C., on brief), for respondent. Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, and ALDRICH and SETH, Circuit Judges. By special designation. MURRAH, Chief Judge. In this unfair labor practice proceedings the Board found the employer

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Elliott-Williams Co.

    345 F.2d 460 (7th Cir. 1965)   Cited 33 times
    Striking down as overbroad a portion of an order that enjoined an employer from "in any other manner" interfering with its employees' organizational and bargaining rights

  7. L.S. Ayres Co. v. N.L.R.B

    551 F.2d 586 (4th Cir. 1977)   Cited 15 times
    In L.S. Ayres Co. v. National Labor Relations Bd., 551 F.2d 586 (4th Cir. 1977), we held that, "the fact that a witness is an employee at the time that he testifies adversely to his employer is at most only a factor bearing upon his credibility and one entitled to little weight unless it is established that he does not know that he is protected in testifying."

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Georgia Rug Mill

    308 F.2d 89 (5th Cir. 1962)   Cited 22 times

    No. 19223. September 18, 1962. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Allison W. Brown, Jr., Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Frank A. Constangy, Atlanta, Ga., for respondent. Before BROWN, WISDOM and BELL, Circuit Judges. WISDOM, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement of its order that the respondent, Georgia Rug Mill, cease violating Section 8(a)(1) of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.S.C.A. §

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Atlanta Coca-Cola Bottling Company

    293 F.2d 300 (5th Cir. 1961)   Cited 23 times
    In Atlanta Coca-Cola, for example, the court was concerned with the General Counsel's failure to produce evidence of discriminatory intent as to each of the individual employees, rather than with the placement of the burden of persuasion. See, e. g., 293 F.2d at 309 ("This is not a case where conflicting inferences of equal weight may be drawn from the record.")

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Montgomery Ward

    242 F.2d 497 (2d Cir. 1957)   Cited 23 times

    No. 211, Docket 24251. Argued January 11, 1957. Decided March 18, 1957. Theophil C. Kammholtz, Gen. Counsel, Stephen Leonard, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Samuel M. Singer and Florian J. Bartosic, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Charles J. Barnhill and David L. Dickson, Chicago, Ill., and T.W. Madden, New York, N.Y., for respondent. Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and LUMBARD and WATERMAN, Circuit Judges. LUMBARD, Circuit Judge. The National Labor