ATLANTIC MAINTENANCE COMPANY, PETITIONER,
v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, RESPONDENT
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.
A discriminatory refusal to hire union members violates the National Labor Relations Act, regardless of whether a contract of employment was formed.
Atlantic sought review of an NLRB order finding it unlawfully discouraged union membership by refusing to hire union members. The Board ordered Atlant…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Back Wages cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner (Atlantic) seeks review of an order of the National Labor Relations Board directing it to cease and desist from discouraging union membership and from interfering with its employees’ right to organize. The Board also ordered Atlantic to offer employment to certain named persons and to pay them back wages. Petitioner seeks to have the order set aside. The Board requests enforcement of the order. Petitioner attacks two factual conclusions of the Board: first, that the persons allegedly discriminated against had applied for employment with Atlantic; and, second, that Atlantic’s refusal to hire those persons was the result of a determination not to employ union members. We think there is support for these findings. The Board could properly have found that name-and-address slips filled out in response to a request by Atlantic’s foreman constituted applications for work; and there was testimony by a former partner in the enterprise, one Braman, from which the Board could have found unlawful motivation.
Atlantic also says that a necessary element of any violation of the National Labor Relations Act is an “actual or constructive contract of employment” which was unlawfully breached. Whether or not there was a completed contract here, as the Board found, is arguable. But even if there was not, this would not excuse the petitioner. A discriminatory refusal to hire in itself is a violation of the Act. Phelps Dodge Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 313 U.S. 177, 61 S.Ct. 845, 85 L.Ed. 1271 (1941).
There is no merit in the petitioner’s objections to the remedy.
The order of the Board will be enforced.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Beraldine L. Acha and Arlene M. Egan v. Beame, 531 F.2d 648 (2d Cir. 1976)
-
Consolidated Freightways v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 669 F.2d 790 (D.C. Cir. 1981)
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Kohler Co., 351 F.2d 798 (D.C. Cir. 1965)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 313 U.S. 177 (U.S. 1941)