NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER,
v.
ALLIED FOOD DISTRIBUTORS, INC., AND/OR FABRO, INCORPORATED, AND/OR INTERNATIONAL MEAT PROCESSORS, INC., RESPONDENTS
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 National Labor Relations Board's order should be enforced because the employer violated the Midwest Piping rule by recognizing one of two rival unions when a real question of representation existed.
The employer entered into a new contract with District 50 while there were conflicting claims from rival unions and a substantial question of represen…
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 Bargaining Unit Determination cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
This application for enforcement of an order of the National Labor Relations Board presents us with no substantial issue of facts, nor is there any disagreement with respect to the basic law which relates to the rule prohibiting an employer from recognizing or contracting with one of two or more rival unions claiming representative status at a time when there are conflicting claims raising a real question of representation.1
We conclude that the Board’s determinations that there was a substantial question as to whether there had been such an accretion of additional activities by the several companies involved in these proceedings as would make it inappropriate for General Teamsters Local Union No. 528 to seek the opportunity to represent some or all of the several units, any one of which might appropriately have been determined by the Board to constitute a suitable bargaining unit is supported by substantial evidence. We also conclude that no previous proceedings foreclose this issue, and that when respondent entered into its new contract with District 50 on April 17, 1967, covering all of the operations with the normal exclusions, this violated the principle recognized by both parties as the Midwest Piping rule. Midwest Piping & Supply Co., 63 NLRB 1060 (1945).
Upon carrying out the Board’s order, the employees of the units in question will have full opportunity to choose their bargaining agent. This, in essence, is what is contemplated by the act. We conclude that the record in this ease warrants the entering of the Board’s order. The Board’s order will be enforced.
. * * * When an employer is faced with conflicting claims of rival unions and a serious question exists as to which union represents a majority of employees, the employer must adhere to a policy of strict neutrality. The employer must withhold recognition of either union, until the rivalry is settled at the polls in a Board-conducted, secret election. N.L.R.B. v. Signal Oil & Gas Co. (5th Cir., 1962) 303 F. 2d 785, 786-787.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Signal OIL & GAS Co., 303 F.2d 785 (5th Cir. 1962)