NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER, CROSS-RESPONDENT, AND LOCAL 1199, DRUG AND HOSPITAL UNION, RWDSU, AFL-CIO, INTERVENOR,
v.
HENRY BOOK ET AL., D/B/A SPRAIN BROOK MANOR, RESPONDENTS, CROSS-PETITIONERS
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 did not err in finding that Sprain Brook Manor violated the National Labor Relations Act.
Sprain Brook Manor recognized and entered into a collective bargaining agreement with a union that did not represent a majority of its employees, desp…
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 Card Check cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM:
On this petition for enforcement and cross-petition for review, the respondent contends that the National Labor Relations Board erred in holding (two members dissenting) that Sprain Brook Manor .violated §§ 8(a)(1), (2), and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 158(a)(1), (2), and (3), by recognizing — and entering into a collective bargaining agreement with — a union that did not represent a majority of the Manor’s employees. Although Joseph Wildebush, an arbitrator selected by the union and the Manor without the consent of the employees, concluded after a “card check” that a majority of the workers had authorized the union to represent them, most of the Manor’s employees later testified 1 to the contrary at a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.
For the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of the National Labor Relations Board, - NLRB - (1975), we grant enforcement of the Board’s order. The cross-petition for review is denied.
. Twenty-five of the Manor’s 101 employees testified orally. The parties stipulated that another 45 employees were prepared to testify “that they did not sign a card for [the union] or in any other way authorize [the union] to represent them . . . .”