Terri-Flex Products, Inc.

12 Cited authorities

Smith v. Evening News Assn
371 U.S. 195 (1962) Cited 815 times
Holding that an employee may sue for breach of a collective bargaining agreement without the union
Sprague v. Ticonic Bank
307 U.S. 161 (1939) Cited 1,047 times
Holding that because a petition for fees is "an independent proceeding supplemental to the original," the suggestion "that it came after the end of the term at which the main decree was entered and [is] therefore too late" was unavailing
H. K. Porter Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
397 U.S. 99 (1970) Cited 222 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the NLRB is "without power to compel a company or a union to agree to any substantive contractual provision of a collective-bargaining agreement."
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Strong
393 U.S. 357 (1969) Cited 115 times
Explaining that, though broad, the NLRA's grant of remedial power "does not authorize punitive measures"
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. C & C Plywood Corp.
385 U.S. 421 (1967) Cited 117 times
Holding that the NLRB has the authority to interpret CBAs in the first instance where its interpretation is for the purpose of “enforc[ing] a statutory right which Congress considered necessary to allow labor and management to get on with the process of reaching fair terms and conditions of employment”
H.J. Heinz Co. v. Labor Board
311 U.S. 514 (1941) Cited 241 times 1 Legal Analyses
In H.J. Heinz Co. v. N.L.R.B., 311 U.S. 514, 61 S.Ct. 320, 85 L.Ed. 309 and Cox v. Gatliff Coal Co., D.C., 59 F. Supp. 882, affirmed 6 Cir., 152 F.2d 52, it was stated that the Act contemplated that a collective bargaining agreement be in writing.
Schauffler v. United Ass'n of Journeymen, Etc
246 F.2d 867 (3d Cir. 1957) Cited 35 times
Affirming that "[i]n any event, the costs were verified . . . to the satisfaction of the district court even though the precise procedure of Section 1924 was not followed"
Burns I. Detective Ag. v. N.L.R.B
441 F.2d 911 (2d Cir. 1971) Cited 18 times
In Burns, the duty to bargain did not mature until late June, at the point when it became clear that the successor had hired the requisite complement of his predecessor's employees.
N.L.R.B. v. George E. Light Boat Storage, Inc.
373 F.2d 762 (5th Cir. 1967) Cited 22 times
No. 22962. February 28, 1967. As Modified March 23, 1967. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Richard S. Rodin, Atty., NLRB, Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Gary Green, Atty., NLRB, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Robert R. Breaker, LaPorte, Tex., for respondent. Before WISDOM, BELL, and AINSWORTH, Circuit Judges. WISDOM, Circuit Judge: The National Labor Relations Board seeks a decree enforcing its order of July 2, 1965, against the George E. Light
N.L.R.B. v. Super Toys, Inc.
458 F.2d 180 (9th Cir. 1972) Cited 12 times
No. 71-1450. March 29, 1972. Stephen H. Naiman (argued), Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Herman M. Levy, Washington, D.C.; Abraham Siegel, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner. David G. Moore (argued) of Reid, Babbage Coil, Riverside, Cal., for respondent. George Pappy, of Brundage, Neyhart, Miller, Ross Reich, Los Angeles, Cal., for the charging party. Before HAMLEY, HUFSTEDLER and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges. HUFSTEDLER, Circuit
Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy
29 U.S.C. § 151 Cited 5,091 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"

Terri-Flex Products, Inc.

12 Cited authorities

Holding that an employee may sue for breach of a collective bargaining agreement without the union

Holding that because a petition for fees is "an independent proceeding supplemental to the original," the suggestion "that it came after the end of the term at which the main decree was entered and [is] therefore too late" was unavailing

Holding that the NLRB is "without power to compel a company or a union to agree to any substantive contractual provision of a collective-bargaining agreement."

Explaining that, though broad, the NLRA's grant of remedial power "does not authorize punitive measures"

In H.J. Heinz Co. v. N.L.R.B., 311 U.S. 514, 61 S.Ct. 320, 85 L.Ed. 309 and Cox v. Gatliff Coal Co., D.C., 59 F. Supp. 882, affirmed 6 Cir., 152 F.2d 52, it was stated that the Act contemplated that a collective bargaining agreement be in writing.

Affirming that "[i]n any event, the costs were verified . . . to the satisfaction of the district court even though the precise procedure of Section 1924 was not followed"

In Burns, the duty to bargain did not mature until late June, at the point when it became clear that the successor had hired the requisite complement of his predecessor's employees.

Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"