Valencia Baxt Express, Inc.

8 Cited authorities

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"
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
Brooks v. Labor Board
348 U.S. 96 (1954) Cited 300 times
Holding that an employer has a duty to bargain in good faith for one year beginning on the date of certification of the bargaining representative by the Board
May Stores Co. v. Labor Board
326 U.S. 376 (1945) Cited 257 times
Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"
Medo Photo Supply Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
321 U.S. 678 (1944) Cited 269 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that offers of benefits to union supporters that induce them to leave the union violate § 8
Hughes Tool Co. v. National Labor Relations Bd.
147 F.2d 69 (5th Cir. 1945) Cited 60 times
In Hughes Tool Co. v. NLRB, 147 F.2d 69 (5th Cir. 1945), the court dealt with a prior version of § 9(a) which did not expressly guarantee the Union's right to be present at the adjustment of grievances. Nevertheless, the court found that such a right existed, and stated that it could be waived.
N.L.R.B. v. Holly-General Co., Div. of Siegler
305 F.2d 670 (9th Cir. 1962) Cited 7 times
No. 17304. June 29, 1962. Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Melvin Pollack, A. Brummel, Attys., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., and Ralph E. Kennedy, Director, National Labor Relations Board, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner. Sweeney, Irwin Foye, and Peter W. Irwin, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent. Before JERTBERG and KOELSCH, Circuit Judges, and JAMES M. CARTER, District Judge. JAMES M. CARTER
N.L.R.B. v. Teamsters
314 F.2d 792 (1st Cir. 1963) Cited 3 times
No. 6050. March 11, 1963. Melvin J. Welles, Washington, D.C., with whom Stuart Rothman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, and Vivian Asplund, Washington, D.C., Attorney, were on brief, for petitioner. Herbert S. Thatcher, Washington, D.C., with whom David S. Barr, Washington, D.C., was on brief, for respondent. Before WOODBURY, Chief Judge, and MARIS and ALDRICH, Circuit Judges. Sitting by designation. ALDRICH, Circuit Judge

Valencia Baxt Express, Inc.

8 Cited authorities

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"

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

Holding that an employer has a duty to bargain in good faith for one year beginning on the date of certification of the bargaining representative by the Board

Requiring "a clear determination by the Board of an attitude of opposition to the purposes of the Act to protect the rights of employees generally"

Holding that offers of benefits to union supporters that induce them to leave the union violate § 8

In Hughes Tool Co. v. NLRB, 147 F.2d 69 (5th Cir. 1945), the court dealt with a prior version of § 9(a) which did not expressly guarantee the Union's right to be present at the adjustment of grievances. Nevertheless, the court found that such a right existed, and stated that it could be waived.