12 Cited authorities
Steelworkers v. Warrior Gulf Co.
363 U.S. 574 (1960) Cited 5,630 times 6 Legal AnalysesHolding that grievance machinery “is at the very heart of the system of industrial self-government” and the courts should not deny an order to arbitrate “unless it may be said with positive assurance that the arbitration clause is not susceptible of an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute”
John Wiley Sons v. Livingston
376 U.S. 543 (1964) Cited 1,773 times 8 Legal AnalysesHolding that a court should decide whether an arbitration agreement survived a corporate merger and bound the resulting corporation
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Burns International Security Services, Inc.
406 U.S. 272 (1972) Cited 480 times 50 Legal AnalysesHolding that a successor is not bound to substantive terms of previous collective bargaining agreement
Howard Johnson Co. v. Detroit Local Joint Exec. Bd., Hotel & Rest. Emps. & Bartenders Int'l Union, AFL-CIO
417 U.S. 249 (1974) Cited 368 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding under NLRA that purchaser of hotel assets was not required to arbitrate with union about its decision not to hire all of seller’s employees
Garment Workers v. Labor Board
366 U.S. 731 (1961) Cited 213 times 4 Legal AnalysesHolding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support
ZIM'S FOODLINER, INC. v. N.L.R.B
495 F.2d 1131 (7th Cir. 1974) Cited 44 timesHolding that the owner of a single store purchased from the Kroger chain was a successor employer
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Armato
199 F.2d 800 (7th Cir. 1952) Cited 38 timesNo. 10691. November 19, 1952. George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate Gen. Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Thomas J. McDermott, Dominick L. Manoli, Attys., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. O.S. Hoebreckx and Clark M. Robertson, Robertson Hoebreckx, Milwaukee, Wis., for respondents. Before MAJOR, Chief Judge, and LINDLEY and SWAIM, Circuit Judges. LINDLEY, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board, pursuant to the provisions
International Ass'n, Machinists v. N.L.R.B
414 F.2d 1135 (D.C. Cir. 1969) Cited 13 timesNo. 21972. Argued January 15, 1969. Decided May 2, 1969. Certiorari Denied October 27, 1969. See 90 S.Ct. 174. Mr. Herbert M. Ansell, Los Angeles, Cal., of the bar of the Supreme Court of California, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Mr. Plato E. Papps, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for petitioners. Mr. Richard N. Chapman, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, with whom Messrs. Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, and Marcel Mallet-Prevost
Makela Welding, Inc., v. N.L.R.B
387 F.2d 40 (6th Cir. 1967) Cited 12 timesNo. 17348. December 15, 1967. Judith Bleich Kahn, Ann Arbor, Mich., for petitioners, Theodore Messner and Gerald Vairo, Messner LaBine, Houghton, Mich., on brief, Judith Bleich Kahn, Ann Arbor, Mich., of counsel. Nancy M. Sherman, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent, Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., of counsel. Before PHILLIPS, PECK, and McCREE, Circuit Judges
N.L.R.B. v. Polytech, Incorporated
469 F.2d 1226 (8th Cir. 1972) Cited 6 timesNo. 71-1645. Submitted October 18, 1972. Decided December 8, 1972. Elliott Moore, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Elton L. French, St. Louis, Mo., for respondents. Appeal from the National Labor Relations Board. Before HEANEY and STEPHENSON, Circuit Judges, and BOGUE, District Judge. District of South Dakota, sitting by special designation. STEPHENSON, Circuit Judge. The NLRB applies for enforcement of its order, reported at 186 NLRB No. 148. The Board found respondent Polytech
Section 159 - Representatives and elections
29 U.S.C. § 159 Cited 2,449 times 12 Legal AnalysesGranting a bargaining unit the exclusive right to represent employees in it