§

South Central timber Development, Inc.

230 N.L.R.B. 468 (N.L.R.B. 1977)
South Central timber Development, Inc.

12 Cited authorities

  1. Gateway Coal Co. v. Mine Workers

    414 U.S. 368 (1974)   Cited 369 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that contractual agreement to submit disagreements to binding arbitration included disputes over safety and thus gave rise to implied obligation not to strike over such disputes

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Great Dane Trailers, Inc.

    388 U.S. 26 (1967)   Cited 322 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding of discriminatory conduct as the Company failed to meet its burden of establishing legitimate motives for its conduct

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fleetwood Trailer Co.

    389 U.S. 375 (1967)   Cited 233 times
    In Fleetwood Trailer, 389 U.S. 375, 88 S.Ct. 543, the Supreme Court was required to determine whether the employer violated the Act when it hired six new employees who had not previously worked for the company instead of six former strikers who had applied for reinstatement.

  4. 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

  5. Labor Bd. v. Washington Aluminum Co.

    370 U.S. 9 (1962)   Cited 206 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. International Van Lines

    409 U.S. 48 (1972)   Cited 71 times
    Holding that a statement that striking employees "are being permanently replaced" constituted an unlawful discharge when permanent replacements had not been hired

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Okla-Inn

    488 F.2d 498 (10th Cir. 1973)   Cited 27 times

    No. 72-1737. Argued and Submitted May 22, 1973. Decided October 26, 1973. Rehearing Denied January 23, 1974. Elliott Moore, Acting Asst. Gen. Counsel, Russell H. Gardner, William F. Wachter, Marjorie S. Godfreed, Peter G. Nash, John S. Irving, and Patrick Hardin, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. C. A. Kothe and Richard L. Barnes, Koths Eagleton, Inc., Tulsa, Okl., for respondent. John M. Keefer, Jarboe Keefer, Tulsa, Okl., for intervenor. Before SETH and DOYLE, Circuit Judges, and LARAMORE, Senior

  8. Electromec Design and Dev. Co. v. N.L.R.B

    409 F.2d 631 (9th Cir. 1969)   Cited 24 times

    No. 22464. March 27, 1969. R.L. Hofvendahl (argued), of Cottrell, Hofvendahl Roessler, San Jose, Cal., for petitioner. Leon M. Kestenbaum (argued), Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Lawrence M. Joseph, Atty., Washington, D.C., Roy O. Hoffman, NLRB, San Francisco, Cal., for respondent. Before JERTBERG and CARTER, Circuit Judges, and BYRNE, District Judge. Hon. William M. Byrne, Senior United States District Judge, sitting

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Plastilite Corporation

    375 F.2d 343 (8th Cir. 1967)   Cited 18 times

    No. 18443. March 30, 1967. Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel and Burton L. Raimi, Atty. N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., were on the brief with her. John E. Tate, of Nelson, Harding, Acklie, Leonard Tate, Lincoln, Neb., for respondent. Before VAN OOSTERHOUT, GIBSON and HEANEY, Circuit Judges. HEANEY, Circuit Judge. This case is

  10. Section 158 - Unfair labor practices

    29 U.S.C. § 158   Cited 10,317 times   84 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355

  11. Section 157 - Right of employees as to organization, collective bargaining, etc.

    29 U.S.C. § 157   Cited 3,302 times   97 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees the right to engage in or refrain from engaging in union activity

  12. Section 152 - Definitions

    29 U.S.C. § 152   Cited 3,213 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Defining a supervisor to include “any individual having authority . . . to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibly to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judgment”