NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER,
v.
WILLIAM S. SHURETT, DOING BUSINESS AS GREYHOUND TERMINAL, 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.
The court held that the employer violated the National Labor Relations Act by refusing to bargain with the union and by threatening employees.
The employer refused to bargain with a union after a majority of employees went on strike and picketed. The employer also allegedly offered inducement…
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 Threats Of Reprisal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The record before us adequately supports the findings of which Respondent complains, that jurisdiction of the Board was properly asserted; that Respondent refused to bargain with the Union and thereby violated Section 8(a) (5) and (1) of the Act; and that Respondent violated Section 8(a) (1) of the Act by offering inducement and by making a threat of reprisal in an effort to have a strike abandoned. 29 U.S.C.A. § 158(a) (1) and (5).
While we do not condone a practice of a Union striking and picketing an employer within two days after demanding recognition, it nevertheless appears in this ease that General Counsel carried the burden of proving that the refusal to recognize the Union as the bargaining agent was not in the requisite good faith. Smith Transfer Co. v. N. L. R. B., 5 Cir., 1953, 204 F. 2d 738; N. L. R. B. v. Stewart, 5 Cir., 1953, 207 F. 2d 8; N. L. R. B. v. Poultry Enterprises, Inc., 5 Cir., 1953, 207 F. 2d 522; and N. L. R. B. v. Southeastern Rubber Mfg. Co., 5 Cir., 1954, 213 F. 2d 11.
We are aware of and have recognized the dilemma in which an employer finds himself when an Union demands certification prior to an election. See N. L. R. B. v. Dan River Mills, Incorporated, 5 Cir., 1960, 274 F. 2d 381. But the small employer here could have hardly been in doubt after a majority of his employees took to the picket line, and after he was fully advised as to the law. Cf. N. L. R. B. v. American Aggregate Co., 5 Cir., 1962, 305 F. 2d 559; Scobell Chemical Co. v. N. L. R. B., 2 Cir., 1959, 267 F. 2d 922; N. L. R. B. v. Barney’s Supercenter, Inc., 3 Cir., 1961, 296 F. 2d 91; and N. L. R. B. v. Harris-Woodson Co., 4 Cir., 1950, 179 F. 2d 720.
The order therefore must be and is enforced.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Indep., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 406 F.2d 203 (5th Cir. 1969)
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. The Great Atl. & Pac. TEA Co., Inc., 346 F.2d 936 (5th Cir. 1965)
-
Skyline Homes, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 323 F.2d 642 (5th Cir. 1963)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Mills, 274 F.2d 381 (5th Cir. 1960)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Stewart, 207 F.2d 8 (5th Cir. 1953)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Poultry Enters., Inc., 207 F.2d 522 (5th Cir. 1953)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Harris-Woodson Co., Inc., 179 F.2d 720 (4th Cir. 1950)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Se. Rubber MFG. Co., Inc., 213 F.2d 11 (5th Cir. 1954)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Barney's Supercenter, Inc., 296 F.2d 91 (3d Cir. 1961)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Am. Aggregate Co., Inc., 305 F.2d 559 (5th Cir. 1962)
- Smith Transfer Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 204 F.2d 738 (5th Cir. 1953)
- Scobell Chem. Co., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 267 F.2d 922 (2d Cir. 1959)