NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
v.
NASHUA MANUFACTURING CORPORATION OF TEXAS

5th Cir. | 1955-01-21
No. 15204
218 F.2d 886 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1955) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.


Holding

The court held that while the evidence supported the findings of the examiner and the Board, the order was too broad and required amendment.


Facts & Procedural History

The examiner found that the respondent interrogated employees about union affiliations and discouraged union membership, violating the Act. The Board …

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
HUTCHESON, Chief Judge.

HUTCHESON, Chief Judge.

Upon findings that respondent had, in violation of the Act, interrogated its employees concerning their, union affiliations and had made statements and taken attitudes designed and calculated to discourage them from assisting or being members of a union, the examiner concluded and recommended that it be required to cease and desist from such practices.

The Board, in a decision and order reported in 108 N.L.R.B. 117, approved the findings of the examiner, entered the order recommended by him, and is here, by petition, brief, and oral argument, seeking its enforcement.

Respondent, in a vigorous brief and argument, citing cases in support, challenges findings of the examiner as without support in the evidence, and insists that, upon the view of the evidence most favorable to the Board, the things said and done were not in violation of the Act, and upon the authority of N.L.R.B. v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 2 Cir., 192 F. 2d 160, that the order forbidding the interrogation of employees was too broad.

An examination of the evidence, as Board and respondent set it out, convinces us that, fairly considered, the evidence supports the findings of examiner and Board. Since, however, the order is too broad in unqualifiedly forbidding mere interrogation of employees concerning their union affiliations, the order will be amended by inserting before the word “interrogating” the words “coercively or otherwise unlawfully”. As thus amended, the order will be enforced.

Amended and enforced.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw