§

The Brescome Distributors Corp.

179 N.L.R.B. 787 (N.L.R.B. 1969)
The Brescome Distributors Corp.

16 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,035 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  2. Inland Empire Council v. Millis

    325 U.S. 697 (1945)   Cited 106 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Inland Empire, a union that had lost a representation election brought suit in district court challenging the Board's proceedings on the ground that there had not been the "appropriate hearing" mandated by Section 9(c) of the NLRA. It argued that the failure to provide such a hearing violated the union's statutory and due process rights.

  3. Bourne v. N.L.R.B

    332 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1964)   Cited 93 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Bourne, we held that interrogation which does not contain express threats is not an unfair labor practice unless certain "fairly severe standards" are met showing that the very fact of interrogation was coercive.

  4. Jas. H. Matthews Co. v. N.L.R.B

    354 F.2d 432 (8th Cir. 1966)   Cited 54 times
    In James H. Matthews Co., supra, the employee in question signed an authorization card. Later the union received a letter, postmarked 11 days after the effective date for determining majority status of the union, requesting return of the employee's authorization card. Allegedly, the letter was neither written, dated, nor addressed by the employee and was originally left with an undisclosed person.

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Solo Cup Company

    237 F.2d 521 (8th Cir. 1956)   Cited 40 times

    No. 15524. October 18, 1956. Rehearing Denied November 16, 1956. Samuel M. Singer, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Theophil C. Kammholz, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., were with him on the brief), for petitioner. John J. Hasburgh, Kansas City, Mo. (Carl E. Enggas and Watson S. Marshall Enggas, Kansas City, Mo., were with him on the brief), for respondent. Before WOODROUGH

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Gotham Shoe Manufacturing Co.

    359 F.2d 684 (2d Cir. 1966)   Cited 21 times

    No. 121, Docket 29793. Argued November 3, 1965. Decided January 14, 1966. Harold B. Shore, Atty., National Labor Relations Board (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel and Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Samuel K. Levene, Binghamton, N.Y. (David Levene, Levene, Gouldin Thompson, Binghamton, N.Y., of counsel), for respondent. Before KAUFMAN and HAYS, Circuit

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Air Master Corporation

    339 F.2d 553 (3d Cir. 1964)   Cited 18 times

    No. 14777. Argued September 22, 1964. Decided December 14, 1964. Melvin Welles, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Gladys Kessler, Atty., N.L.R.B., on the brief), for petitioner. Robert E. Wachs, Wolf, Block, Schorr Solis-Cohen, Philadelphia, Pa., for Air Master Corp. and others Saul C. Waldbaum, Philadelphia, Pa., for Union. Before HASTIE and FORMAN, Circuit Judges, and KIRKPATRICK

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Des Moines Foods, Inc.

    296 F.2d 285 (8th Cir. 1961)   Cited 20 times

    No. 16694. November 29, 1961. Leo N. McGuire, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. made argument for petitioner. Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Samuel M. Singer, Atty., and Leo N. McGuire, Atty., NLRB, Washington, D.C. were on the brief. Hobart E. Newton, Stuart, Iowa, made argument for respondent, and was on the brief. Before SANBORN, MATTHES and RIDGE, Circuit Judges. SANBORN

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Firedoor Corporation of America

    291 F.2d 328 (2d Cir. 1961)   Cited 17 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Firedoor Corp. of America, 2 Cir., 291 F.2d 328, 331, the rule under discussion is stated, "Interrogation of employees is legal, when the questioning is not accompanied by any explicit threats, cf. N.L.R.B. v. Beaner [Beaver] Meadow Creamery, 3 Cir., 1954, 215 F.2d 247, if under all the circumstances coercion is not implicit in the questioning.

  10. Retail Clerks Union, Local 770 v. N.L.R.B

    370 F.2d 205 (9th Cir. 1966)   Cited 10 times

    No. 20655. December 19, 1966. Kenneth M. Schwartz, Robert M. Dohrmann, of Arnold, Smith Schwartz, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner. Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Glen M. Bendixsen, Atty., William J. Avrutis, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Ralph Kennedy, Director, N.L.R.B., Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent, N.L.R.B. George E. Bodle, Daniel Fogel, Stephen Reinhardt, Loren R. Rothschild, of Bodle Fogel, Los