§

United Packing Co. of Iowa, Inc.

187 N.L.R.B. 878 (N.L.R.B. 1971)
United Packing Co. of Iowa, Inc.

11 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. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 710 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

  3. Drivers Union v. Meadowmoor Co.

    312 U.S. 287 (1941)   Cited 382 times
    Holding an injunction banning picketing was "justified only by the violence that induced it and only so long as it counteracts a continuing intimidation"

  4. I.A. of M. v. Labor Board

    311 U.S. 72 (1940)   Cited 317 times
    In International Ass'n of Machinists v. N.L.R.B., 1940, 311 U.S. 72, 61 S.Ct. 83, 85 L. Ed. 50, there had been a long history of management favoritism to the established and hostility to the aspiring union; and in Franks Bros. Co. v. N.L.R.B., 1944, 321 U.S. 702, 703, 64 S.Ct. 817, 818, 88 L.Ed. 1020, the employer had "conducted an aggressive campaign against the Union, even to the extent of threatening to close its factory if the union won the election."

  5. Franks Bros. Co. v. Labor Board

    321 U.S. 702 (1944)   Cited 252 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the legitimacy of the Board's view that the unlawful refusal to bargain collectively with employees' chosen representative disrupts employee morale, deters organizational activities, and discourages membership in unions.

  6. 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.

  7. Mine Workers v. Arkansas Flooring Co.

    351 U.S. 62 (1956)   Cited 79 times
    In United Mine Workers v. Arkansas Oak Flooring Co., 351 U.S. 62, 76 S.Ct. 559, 100 L. Ed. 941, references to postlegislative history were referred to in the opinion of the Court.

  8. N.L.R.B. v. P. Lorillard Co.

    314 U.S. 512 (1942)   Cited 76 times

    CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No. 71. Argued December 18, 19, 1941. Decided January 5, 1942. Whether an employer should be required to bargain with a union previously selected as employees' bargaining representative or, in view of lapse of time and changed conditions, a new election should be held is a question for decision by the Board and not by the Circuit Court of Appeals. P. 513. 117 F.2d 921, reversed. CERTIORARI, 313 U.S. 557, to review a judgment entered

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Remington Rand, Inc.

    94 F.2d 862 (2d Cir. 1938)   Cited 178 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Remington Rand, 2 Cir., 94 F.2d 862, 869, the Board had ordered the employer to deal exclusively with a joint board which had brought the unfair labor practice charges involved in that case.

  10. J.C. Penney Co. v. N.L.R.B

    384 F.2d 479 (10th Cir. 1967)   Cited 30 times

    No. 8874. August 29, 1967. William C. McClearn, Denver, Colo. (Robert L. Morris, Morris B. Hecox, Denver, Colo., Eugene F. Rowan and Martin Zeiger, New York City, with him on brief), for petitioner. Peter M. Giesey, Washington, D.C. (Arnold Ordman, Dominick L. Manoli, Marcel Mallet-Prevost and Nancy M. Sherman, Washington, D.C., with him on brief), for respondent. Before MURRAH, Chief Judge, and PICKETT and BREITENSTEIN, Circuit Judges. MURRAH, Chief Judge. This matter arises from two separate unfair