§

Shovel Supply Co., Inc.

162 N.L.R.B. 460 (N.L.R.B. 1966)
Shovel Supply Co., Inc.

13 Cited authorities

  1. Steelworkers v. Warrior Gulf Co.

    363 U.S. 574 (1960)   Cited 5,612 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that grievance machinery “is at the very heart of the system of industrial self-government” and the courts should not deny an order to arbitrate “unless it may be said with positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute”

  2. Textile Workers v. Lincoln Mills

    353 U.S. 448 (1957)   Cited 2,323 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that § 301 expresses a federal policy in favor of the enforceability of labor contracts

  3. May Stores Co. v. Labor Board

    326 U.S. 376 (1945)   Cited 257 times
    Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Reed Prince MFG

    205 F.2d 131 (1st Cir. 1953)   Cited 118 times
    In Reed Prince, supra, this court affirmed the Board's finding of refusal to bargain in good faith only "[a]fter an attentive review of the entire record of the bargaining negotiations."

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ferguson

    257 F.2d 88 (5th Cir. 1958)   Cited 38 times

    No. 16973. June 30, 1958. Thomas J. McDermott, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. George E. Seay, Ralph W. Malone, Malone, Lipscomb Seay, Dallas, Tex., for respondent. Before TUTTLE, BROWN and WISDOM, Circuit Judges. JOHN R. BROWN, Circuit Judge. This is a Petition by the Board for enforcement of an Order, 118 N.L.R.B. No. 30, finding the Employer, Shovel Supply Company, guilty of 8(a)(1), 29 U.S.C.A. § 158(a)(1), violations and requiring the reinstatement of four

  6. San Antonio Machine Supply Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    363 F.2d 633 (5th Cir. 1966)   Cited 18 times

    No. 21687. July 21, 1966. Rehearing Denied August 24, 1966. Theo F. Weiss, L. Bruce Fryburger, San Antonio, Tex., Clemens, Knight, Weiss Spencer, San Antonio, Tex., of counsel, for petitioner. Elliott C. Lichtman, Atty., N.L.R.B., Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Warren M. Davison, Linda R. Sher, Attorneys, N.L.R.B., for respondent. Before BELL and THORNBERRY, Circuit Judges, and FISHER

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Texas Coca-Cola Bottling Company

    365 F.2d 321 (5th Cir. 1966)   Cited 9 times

    No. 21779. June 27, 1966. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Theodore J. Martineau, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Melvin Pollack, Atty., N.L.R.B., for petitioner. David L. Hooper, Abilene, Tex., Hooper Perry, Abilene, Tex., for respondent. Before RIVES, BROWN and MOORE, Circuit Judges. Of the Second Circuit, sitting by designation. PER CURIAM: The Board seeks enforcement of its order against the respondent. The

  8. United Steelwork. of Am. Afl-Cio v. N.L.R.B

    363 F.2d 272 (D.C. Cir. 1966)   Cited 9 times

    Nos. 19492, 19507. Argued March 22, 1966. Decided May 19, 1966. Certiorari Denied October 10, 1966. See 87 S.Ct. 90. Mr. Michael H. Gottesman, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Elliot Bredhoff, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioner in No. 19,492. Mr. Donald C. Winson, Pittsburgh, Pa., of the bar of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Messrs. Bartholomew A. Diggins, Daniel W. Sixbey, Washington, D.C., and Paul R. Obert, Pittsburgh, Pa.,

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Southwestern Porcelain Steel

    317 F.2d 527 (10th Cir. 1963)   Cited 9 times

    No. 7051. May 23, 1963. Rehearing Denied June 24, 1963. Standau E. Weinbrecht, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, Dominick L. Manoli, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, and Melvin Pollack, Washington, D.C., on brief), for petitioner. Harry M. Crowe, Jr., of Crowe, Thieman Froeb, Tulsa, Okla. (Floyd L. Rheam, of Rheam Noss, Tulsa, Okla., on brief), for respondent. Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, and BREITENSTEIN and SETH, Circuit Judges. MURRAH, Chief Judge. The N.L.R.B. seeks enforcement of its order holding respondent

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Mrs. Fay's Pies

    341 F.2d 489 (9th Cir. 1965)   Cited 6 times

    No. 19288. February 3, 1965. Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Melvin J. Welles, Morton Namrow, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Alvin F. Slaight, Jr., Robert M. Mallano, Paul, Hastings, Janofsky Walker, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent. Before CHAMBERS, HAMLIN and ELY, Circuit Judges. ELY, Circuit Judge. Following disputes between Respondent, hereinafter called "Company," and Local 37 Bakery and Confectionery

  11. Section 207 - Maximum hours

    29 U.S.C. § 207   Cited 10,789 times   231 Legal Analyses
    Establishing overtime rules