Twin City Carpenters District Council

15 Cited authorities

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"
Labor Board v. Denver Bldg. Council
341 U.S. 675 (1951) Cited 494 times 1 Legal Analyses
Affirming Board's assertion of jurisdiction over activities taking place at local construction site based on finding that "any widespread application of the practices charged might well result in substantially decreasing" the flow of interstate commerce
Machinists Local v. Labor Board
362 U.S. 411 (1960) Cited 276 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that “a finding of violation which is inescapably grounded on events predating the limitations period” is untimely
Labor Board v. Fruit Packers
377 U.S. 58 (1964) Cited 236 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that NLRA section 8(b)(B) does not prohibit "peaceful picketing . . . limited . . . to persuading Safeway customers not to buy Washington State apples when they traded in Safeway stores"
Allen Bradley Co. v. Union
325 U.S. 797 (1945) Cited 304 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the defendants were not protected by the statutory labor exemption because the union had combined with contractors and manufacturers in order to boycott the plaintiffs' business
Electrical Workers v. Labor Board
341 U.S. 694 (1951) Cited 247 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the prohibition of picketing in furtherance of unlawful objectives is not an abridgement of free speech
Labor Board v. Servette
377 U.S. 46 (1964) Cited 74 times
Holding under section 8(b) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b), that statutory protection for the distribution of handbills would be undermined if a threat to engage in protected conduct were not itself protected
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bus. Mach
228 F.2d 553 (2d Cir. 1955) Cited 67 times
In National Labor Relations Bd. v. Business Mach. etc., CIO (228 F.2d 553) the Circuit Court of Appeals for this circuit declared (p. 559) that "The only thing proscribed by § 8(b)(4) is inducement or encouragement of the employees of the customers".
N.L.R.B. v. International Longshoremen's Ass'n
332 F.2d 992 (4th Cir. 1964) Cited 21 times
In N.L.R.B. v. International Longshoremen's Assoc., 332 F.2d 992 (4th Cir. 1964) the court refused to enforce a cease and desist order of the NLRB because it found no labor dispute had been presented over which the NLRB had jurisdiction.
National Maritime Un., Am. v. N.L.R.B
342 F.2d 538 (2d Cir. 1965) Cited 19 times
Nos. 234, 235, Dockets 29067, 29068. Argued January 15, 1965. Decided March 5, 1965. Abraham E. Freedman, New York City (Charles Sovel, New York City, and Mandell Wright, Houston, Tex., on the brief), for petitioner. Stephen B. Goldberg, N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, and Lawrence M. Joseph, Attorney, N.L.R.B., on the brief), for respondent. Before SMITH, KAUFMAN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges. ANDERSON

Twin City Carpenters District Council

15 Cited authorities

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"

Affirming Board's assertion of jurisdiction over activities taking place at local construction site based on finding that "any widespread application of the practices charged might well result in substantially decreasing" the flow of interstate commerce

Holding that “a finding of violation which is inescapably grounded on events predating the limitations period” is untimely

Holding that NLRA section 8(b)(B) does not prohibit "peaceful picketing . . . limited . . . to persuading Safeway customers not to buy Washington State apples when they traded in Safeway stores"

Holding that the defendants were not protected by the statutory labor exemption because the union had combined with contractors and manufacturers in order to boycott the plaintiffs' business

Holding that the prohibition of picketing in furtherance of unlawful objectives is not an abridgement of free speech

Holding under section 8(b) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b), that statutory protection for the distribution of handbills would be undermined if a threat to engage in protected conduct were not itself protected

In National Labor Relations Bd. v. Business Mach. etc., CIO (228 F.2d 553) the Circuit Court of Appeals for this circuit declared (p. 559) that "The only thing proscribed by § 8(b)(4) is inducement or encouragement of the employees of the customers".

In N.L.R.B. v. International Longshoremen's Assoc., 332 F.2d 992 (4th Cir. 1964) the court refused to enforce a cease and desist order of the NLRB because it found no labor dispute had been presented over which the NLRB had jurisdiction.