§

Southern California Stationers

162 N.L.R.B. 1517 (N.L.R.B. 1967)
Southern California Stationers

18 Cited authorities

  1. Fibreboard Corp. v. Labor Board

    379 U.S. 203 (1964)   Cited 731 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA

  2. Labor Board v. Erie Resistor Corp.

    373 U.S. 221 (1963)   Cited 358 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding Board decision prohibiting employer from granting super-seniority to strike-breakers because "[s]uper-seniority renders future bargaining difficult, if not impossible"

  3. Labor Board v. Insurance Agents

    361 U.S. 477 (1960)   Cited 324 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, subject to the duty to bargain in good faith, "parties should have wide latitude in their negotiations"

  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 Board v. Babcock Wilcox Co.

    351 U.S. 105 (1956)   Cited 294 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot

  6. Labor Board v. American Ins. Co.

    343 U.S. 395 (1952)   Cited 269 times
    Holding the degree of discretion in a CBA "is an issue for determination across the bargaining table, not by the Board"

  7. Textile Workers v. Darlington Co.

    380 U.S. 263 (1965)   Cited 168 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer has the absolute right, at least as far as the NLRA is concerned, to terminate his entire business for any reason

  8. Labor Board v. Steelworkers

    357 U.S. 357 (1958)   Cited 72 times
    In United Steelworkers, the Court warned that the NLRA "does not command that labor organizations as a matter of abstract law, under all circumstances, be protected in the use of every possible means of reaching the minds of individual workers, nor that they are entitled to use a medium of communication simply because the employer is using it."

  9. Sakrete of Northern Calif., Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    332 F.2d 902 (9th Cir. 1964)   Cited 48 times

    No. 18745. May 21, 1964. Rehearing Denied July 9, 1964. Graydon, Head Ritchey, William A. McKenzie, Leslie A. Meek, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner. Arnold Orman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Warren M. Davison and Peter M. Giesey, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Leon Ardzrooni, Neyhart Grodin, San Francisco, Cal., on behalf of amicus curiae-Freight, Construction, General Drivers Helpers, Local 287. Before MADDEN

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Royal Plating Polishing Co.

    350 F.2d 191 (3d Cir. 1965)   Cited 43 times
    In NLRB v. Royal Plating Polishing Co., Inc., 350 F.2d 191, 196 (3d Cir. 1965), the court characterized a company's decision to close a plant when "faced with the economic necessity of either moving or consolidating the operations of a failing business" as a "management decision which [is] fundamental to the basic direction of a corporate enterprise" and which lies "at the core of entrepreneurial control.