§

Simplex Wire & Cable Co.

313 N.L.R.B. 1311 (N.L.R.B. 1994)
Simplex Wire & Cable Co.

7 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. City Disposal Systems, Inc.

    465 U.S. 822 (1984)   Cited 206 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "lone employee's invocation of a right grounded in his collective-bargaining agreement is . . . a concerted activity in a very real sense" because the employee is in effect reminding his employer of the power of the group that brought about the agreement and that could be reharnessed if the employer refuses to respect the employee's objection

  2. Labor Board v. Electrical Workers

    346 U.S. 464 (1953)   Cited 125 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Upholding discharge where employees publicly disparaged quality of employer's product, with no discernible relationship to pending labor dispute

  3. Prill v. N.L.R.B

    835 F.2d 1481 (D.C. Cir. 1987)   Cited 27 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that an employee takes concerted action “when he acts with the actual participation or on the authority of his co-workers”

  4. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    407 F.2d 1357 (4th Cir. 1969)   Cited 38 times
    Noting that, while timing is a factor, "the thrust of Exchange Parts is the condemnation of granting such benefits with the purpose of affecting the outcome of an election"

  5. Jeannette Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    532 F.2d 916 (3d Cir. 1976)   Cited 25 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Sustaining the Board's finding that the employer's rule broadly prohibiting wage discussions was an unfair labor practice under § 8, reasoning that "wage discussions can be protected activity and that an employer's unqualified rule barring such discussions has the tendency to inhibit such activity"

  6. American Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. N.L.R.B

    600 F.2d 132 (8th Cir. 1979)   Cited 4 times

    No. 78-1233. Submitted November 14, 1978. Decided June 4, 1979. Fredric Ingram of Thomas, Taliaferro, Forman, Burr Murray, Birmingham, Ala. (argued), and Robert F. Childs, Jr., Birmingham, Ala., on brief, for petitioner. Candace M. Carroll, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (argued), John S. Irving, Gen. Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel, Robert E. Allen, Acting Associate Gen. Counsel, and Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., on brief, for respondent. Appeal

  7. Texaco, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    462 F.2d 812 (3d Cir. 1972)   Cited 10 times

    No. 71-1281. Argued January 3, 1972. Decided May 4, 1972. Robert H. Kleeb, Philadelphia, Pa., for petitioner. Nancy Sherman, N.L.R.B. Washington, D.C., for respondent. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before SEITZ, Chief Judge, and HASTIE and JAMES ROSEN, Circuit Judges. OPINION OF THE COURT HASTIE, Circuit Judge. We here review an order of the National Labor Relations Board upon a petition of Texaco Inc. to set that order aside and a cross-application of the Board for