Woodcliff Lake Hilton Inn, Inc.
2 Cited authorities
Labor Board v. Parts Co.
375 U.S. 405 (1964) Cited 213 times 1 Legal AnalysesHolding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”
N.L.R.B. v. Peninsula Ass'n for Retarded
627 F.2d 202 (9th Cir. 1980) Cited 10 timesNo. 79-7053. Argued and Submitted April 16, 1980. Decided September 9, 1980. Lawrence E. Blatnik, Washington, D.C., argued, for petitioner; Elliott Moore, Allison W. Brown, Jr., Washington, D.C., on brief. Kathleen Marie Kelly, San Francisco, Cal., argued, for respondent; Nancy L. Ober, Littler, Mendelson, Fastiff Tichy, William C. Wright, San Francisco, Cal., on brief. On Petition to Review a Decision of the National Labor Relations Board. Before MERRILL and SKOPIL, Circuit Judges, and WYATT, District