M & S STEEL COMPANY, INC., PETITIONER,
v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, RESPONDENT

5th Cir. | 1965-11-16
No. 21898
353 F.2d 80 Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (1965) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 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 the company violated the National Labor Relations Act by prohibiting union literature distribution and interrogating an employee, and that the Board's order was valid.


Facts & Procedural History

M & S Steel Company petitioned to review an order from the National Labor Relations Board. The Board found the company violated the Act by prohibiting…

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
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

In this case, M & S Steel Company, Incorporated filed its petition to review and set aside an order of the National Labor Relations Board, 29 U.S.C.A. § 151 et seq., (§ 10(f) of the Act).

In answer the Board has requested enforcement of its order. The Board concluded that the company violated § 8(a) (1) of the Act by (1) promulgating a rule which prohibited its employees from distributing union liter ature on their own time in non-working areas of the plant; and (2) interrogating employee Tommie Williams concerning his protected activities in such fashion as to constitute interference, restraint, and coercion within the meaning of the Act. The Board also found that the company violated § 8(a) (1), (3) and (4) of the Act by discriminatorily discharging Williams because of his union activities and his resort to the Board for assistance.

It is our conclusion that the record as a whole amply supports the findings and conclusions of the Board, and that the Board’s order is valid and proper. See Republic Aviation Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 324 U.S. 793, 803, n. 10, 65 S.Ct. 982, 988, 89 L.Ed. 1372, 1379; N. L. R. B. v. Walton Mfg. Co. (5 Cir.) 289 F. 2d 177, 180; N. L. R. B. v. Griggs Equipment (5 Cir.) 307 F. 2d 275, 278; Pratt & Whitney Aircraft Div., etc. v. N. L. R. B. (5 Cir.) 310 F. 2d 676, 679; N. L. R. B. v. Ewell Engineering & Contracting Co. (5 Cir.) 315 F. 2d 375. Accordingly, the petition to review is denied, and the Board’s order is enforced.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw