United Steelworkers Local 1379

Labor Board v. Burnup Sims
379 U.S. 21 (1964) Cited 106 times 21 Legal Analyses
Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"
Local 542, Int'l Un. of Oper. E. v. N.L.R.B
328 F.2d 850 (3d Cir. 1964) Cited 44 times
No. 14286. Argued October 10, 1963. Decided March 13, 1964. Abraham E. Freedman, Philadelphia, Pa. (Martin J. Vigderman, Wilfred F. Lorry, Freedman, Landy Lorry, Philadelphia, Pa., on the brief), for petitioner. Leo Maguire, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Melvin Pollack, Atty., N.L.R.B., on the brief), for respondent. Earle K. Shawe, Baltimore, Md. (Sidney J. Barban, Baltimore,
J.J. Newberry Co. v. N.L.R.B
442 F.2d 897 (2d Cir. 1971) Cited 17 times
In Newberry, the status quo with regard to wage increases was unclear not so much because wage review was not predictable — on the contrary, an employee was reviewed every six months, "although the timing might vary by several months," 442 F.2d at 898 — but because wage increases were neither "automatic nor uniform.