§

St. Regis Paper Co.

191 N.L.R.B. 818 (N.L.R.B. 1971)
St. Regis Paper Co.

10 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Wyman-Gordon Co.

    394 U.S. 759 (1969)   Cited 809 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding invalid a legislative rule developed in agency adjudication

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Allis-Chalmers Manufacturing Co.

    388 U.S. 175 (1967)   Cited 334 times
    Holding that majority rule concept is at the center of federal labor policy

  3. 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.”

  4. Garment Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 731 (1961)   Cited 213 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support

  5. Labor Board v. Cabot Carbon Co.

    360 U.S. 203 (1959)   Cited 57 times
    Concluding that "dealing with" as used in 29 U.S.C. § 152 is a "broad term" and is not synonymous to "bargaining with"

  6. Welch Scientific Company v. N.L.R.B

    340 F.2d 199 (2d Cir. 1965)   Cited 24 times
    In Welch Scientific Co. v. NLRB, 340 F.2d 199 (2 Cir. 1965), neither the Trial Examiner's report nor the Board's decision referred to the three-fold criteria, and the Board's brief in this court sought to justify the order as to interrogation only on the basis of lack of any proper purpose.

  7. Lake City Foundry Company v. N.L.R.B

    432 F.2d 1162 (7th Cir. 1970)   Cited 16 times
    In Lake City Foundry Co. v. NLRB, 432 F.2d 1162 (7th Cir. 1970), the employee ceased work prior to the date on which the union claimed a card majority.

  8. Chicago Rawhide Mfg. v. Natl. Labor Rel. Bd.

    221 F.2d 165 (7th Cir. 1955)   Cited 31 times
    In Chicago Rawhide, this Court concluded that: "[n]either mere cooperation, preference, nor possibility of control constitute unfair labor practices; and the Board may not infer conduct that is violative of the Act from conduct that is not, unless there is a substantial basis, in fact or reason, for that inference."

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Post Publishing Company

    311 F.2d 565 (7th Cir. 1962)   Cited 9 times
    Permitting union to hold meetings in company cafeteria, use copier and retain profits from cafeteria operations "a permissible form of friendly cooperation designed to foster and resulting in uninterrupted harmonious labor-management relations" not intended to coerce employees

  10. Continental Distilling Sales Co. v. N.L.R.B

    348 F.2d 246 (7th Cir. 1965)   Cited 4 times

    Nos. 14463, 14516. June 28, 1965. Harold A. Katz, Irving M. Friedman, Glenn P. Schwartz, Chicago, James C. Paradise, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner Union. Lee A. Freeman, William L. Sharp, Sanford I. Wolff, Chicago, for Continental Distilling Sales Co., petitioner. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Melvin Pollack, Atty., N.L.R.B., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before DUFFY, KNOCH and KILEY, Circuit Judges. DUFFY