NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER,
v.
INTERNATIONAL UNION OF OPERATING ENGINEERS, LOCAL 18, AFL-CIO, 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 National Labor Relations Board's order is enforceable because its factual findings are supported by substantial evidence.
The National Labor Relations Board applied for enforcement of its order against Respondent, finding violations of the National Labor Relations Act. Re…
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 National Labor Relations Act § 10(E) Enforcement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this action the National Labor Relations Board has applied, pursuant to Section 10(e) of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. § 160(e)), for enforcement of its Order issued against the Respondent August 27, 1973. The Board’s Decision and Order are reported at 205 NLRB 146.
The Board found that Respondent had violated §§ 8(b)(2) and 8(b)(1)(A) of the Act in actions involving Union members Walter Shimman and Glenn Oberle and § 8(b)(1)(A) by threatening members with loss of employment opportunities and related reprisals because they opposed the incumbent leadership of the Union. The Board ordered certain specific relief and the posting and mailing of notice.
Respondent asserts that the Order is not supported by substantial evi dence, particular attack being made upon the decisions of the Administrative Law Judge on the credibility of witnesses. There are substantial conflicts in the testimony, but it is the function of the Board to resolve questions of fact and credibility, and, if there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s findings, they must be accepted by this Court. National Labor Relations Act, Section 10(e), 29 U.S.C. § 160(e); Universal Camera Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 340 U.S. 474, 71 S.Ct. 456, 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951); N.L.R.B. v. RAWAC Plating Co., 422 F. 2d 1259 (6th Cir. 1970).
Upon consideration of the entire record, the briefs and oral arguments, the Court concludes that the factual findings of the Board are supported by substantial evidence and that the Administrative Law Judge did not abuse his discretion in making determinations as to credibility of witnesses.
The Order of the Board is enforced.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Farmer v. United Bhd. OF Carpenters & Joiners OF Am., 430 U.S. 290 (U.S. 1977)
-
Shimman v. Frank, 625 F.2d 80 (6th Cir. 1980)
-
Krispy Kreme Doughnut Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 732 F.2d 1288 (6th Cir. 1984)
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 340 U.S. 474 (U.S. 1951)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Rawac Plating Co., 422 F.2d 1259 (6th Cir. 1970)