Westinghouse Electric Corp.

12 Cited authorities

Fibreboard Corp. v. Labor Board
379 U.S. 203 (1964) Cited 731 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA
Labor Board v. Truitt Mfg. Co.
351 U.S. 149 (1956) Cited 223 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that the duty to produce information relevant to a bargaining issue is derivative from the broader statutory duty to bargain in good-faith
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.
N.L.R.B. v. Royal Plating Polishing Co.
350 F.2d 191 (3d Cir. 1965) Cited 43 times
In NLRB v. Royal Plating Polishing Co., Inc., 350 F.2d 191, 196 (3d Cir. 1965), the court characterized a company's decision to close a plant when "faced with the economic necessity of either moving or consolidating the operations of a failing business" as a "management decision which [is] fundamental to the basic direction of a corporate enterprise" and which lies "at the core of entrepreneurial control.
N.L.R.B. v. Rapid Bindery, Inc.
293 F.2d 170 (2d Cir. 1961) Cited 48 times
In NLRB v. Rapid Bindery Inc., 293 F.2d at 176, the Second Circuit held that "conjecture or rumor is not an adequate substitute for an employer's formal notice to a union of a vital change in working conditions.
Cooper Thermometer Company v. N.L.R.B
376 F.2d 684 (2d Cir. 1967) Cited 18 times
Affirming a Board finding of an unfair labor practice where employer did not provide employees with information about how they could transfer to a new plant after operations at an initial plant were terminated
Int'l United A., A., A. v. N.L.R.B
394 F.2d 757 (D.C. Cir. 1968) Cited 7 times
In UAW, Pierce Governor Company operated a production facility in Anderson, Indiana, where the employees were represented by Local 940; for several decades, the “contracts had been made between the Company ‘and the International and its Local 940, jointly (herein called “the Union”), as the “exclusive bargaining agency” for the employees....’ ” Id. at 761 (emphasis added).
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Lewis
246 F.2d 886 (9th Cir. 1957) Cited 16 times
In Lewis, a partnership that manufactured and sold shoes gradually transferred the manufacturing portion of its business to a corporation at a different location.
Robertshaw Controls Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
386 F.2d 377 (4th Cir. 1967) Cited 6 times
No. 10985. Argued March 7, 1967. Decided November 3, 1967. Francis V. Lowden, Jr., Richmond, Va. (R. Kenneth Wheeler, and Hunton, Williams, Gay, Powell Gibson, Richmond, Va., on the brief), for petitioner. Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and John Taylor, Atty., N.L.R.B., on the brief), for respondent. Before BOREMAN and WINTER, Circuit Judges, and SIMONS, District Judge. WINTER,
National Labor Rel. Board v. Franks Bros. Co.
137 F.2d 989 (1st Cir. 1943) Cited 19 times
No. 3872. July 27, 1943. Petition for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Proceeding by the National Labor Relations Board against the Franks Brothers Company for enforcement of the board's order directing respondent to bargain collectively with the Amalgamated Clothing Workers of America, CIO, as the exclusive representative of respondent's employees, and refrain from interfering with, restraining or coercing such employees. Decree enforcing the order. Malcolm A. Hoffmann
Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy
29 U.S.C. § 151 Cited 5,092 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"

Westinghouse Electric Corp.

12 Cited authorities

Holding that the "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA

Holding that the duty to produce information relevant to a bargaining issue is derivative from the broader statutory duty to bargain in good-faith

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.

In NLRB v. Rapid Bindery Inc., 293 F.2d at 176, the Second Circuit held that "conjecture or rumor is not an adequate substitute for an employer's formal notice to a union of a vital change in working conditions.

Affirming a Board finding of an unfair labor practice where employer did not provide employees with information about how they could transfer to a new plant after operations at an initial plant were terminated

In Lewis, a partnership that manufactured and sold shoes gradually transferred the manufacturing portion of its business to a corporation at a different location.

Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"