Suburban Transit Corp. And Suburban Trails, Inc.

10 Cited authorities

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
National Woodwork Manufacturers Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
386 U.S. 612 (1967) Cited 392 times
Holding that union employees' refusal to install third-party manufacturer's product was not prohibited under § 158(b)(B), because it was an action "pressuring the [union members'] employer for agreements regulating relations between [the employer] and his own employees"
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
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
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n
447 U.S. 490 (1980) Cited 65 times 4 Legal Analyses
In NLRB v. Longshoremen, 447 U.S. 490 (1980) (ILA I), we reviewed the National Labor Relations Board's conclusion that the Rules and their enforcement constituted unlawful secondary activity under §§ 8(b)(4)(B) and 8(e) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b)(4) (B) and 158(e).
Timken Roller Bearing Company v. N.L.R.B
325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963) Cited 56 times
In Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. NLRB, 325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 971, 84 S.Ct. 1135, 12 L.Ed.2d 85 (1964), the court considered a union request for information concerning five grievances that awaited hearings before a chosen arbitrator.
Los Angeles Marine Hardware Co. v. N.L.R.B
602 F.2d 1302 (9th Cir. 1979) Cited 18 times
No. 78-1907. May 2, 1979. Anthony T. Oliver, Jr. (argued), Parker, Milliken, Clark O'Hara, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioners. Elliott Moore, Michael Nicholson (argued), N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. On Petition to Review a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Before WRIGHT and WALLACE, Circuit Judges, and TEMPLAR, Senior District Judge. Of the District of Kansas. EUGENE A. WRIGHT, Circuit Judge: Los Angeles Marine Hardware Co. (LA Marine) and California Marine
Leeds Northrup Company v. N.L.R.B
391 F.2d 874 (3d Cir. 1968) Cited 31 times
In Leeds Northrup Co. v. NLRB, 391 F.2d 874 (3rd Cir. 1968), the Third Circuit enforced the Board's order requiring the company to grant backpay to union employees based on a prior compensation formula where the company had unilaterally altered the formula in violation of its duty to bargain.
University of Chicago v. N.L.R.B
514 F.2d 942 (7th Cir. 1975) Cited 15 times
In Univ. of Chicago v. N.L.R.B., 514 F.2d 942 (7th Cir. 1975), the University had transferred custodial work from one bargaining unit to another after bargaining to impasse over the transfer.
N.L.R.B. v. Raytheon Company
445 F.2d 272 (9th Cir. 1971) Cited 7 times
Nos. 22572, 22572A. June 23, 1971. John I. Taylor (argued), Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Roy O. Hoffman, Director, N.L.R.B., San Francisco, Cal., for N.L.R.B. Alfred C. Phillips, Lexington, Mass. (argued), for Raytheon Co. Melvin Warshaw, for Union of Elec. Radio Machine Wkrs., Washington, D.C. Before CHAMBERS, KOELSCH and BROWNING, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: These cases are here for decision on the merits pursuant to the Supreme Court's remand of No. 22

Suburban Transit Corp. And Suburban Trails, Inc.

10 Cited authorities

Holding that the "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA

Holding that union employees' refusal to install third-party manufacturer's product was not prohibited under § 158(b)(B), because it was an action "pressuring the [union members'] employer for agreements regulating relations between [the employer] and his own employees"

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

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

In Timken Roller Bearing Co. v. NLRB, 325 F.2d 746 (6th Cir. 1963), cert. denied, 376 U.S. 971, 84 S.Ct. 1135, 12 L.Ed.2d 85 (1964), the court considered a union request for information concerning five grievances that awaited hearings before a chosen arbitrator.

In Leeds Northrup Co. v. NLRB, 391 F.2d 874 (3rd Cir. 1968), the Third Circuit enforced the Board's order requiring the company to grant backpay to union employees based on a prior compensation formula where the company had unilaterally altered the formula in violation of its duty to bargain.

In Univ. of Chicago v. N.L.R.B., 514 F.2d 942 (7th Cir. 1975), the University had transferred custodial work from one bargaining unit to another after bargaining to impasse over the transfer.