EVERGREEN HELICOPTERS, INC., PETITIONER,
v.
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, 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 Board's order should not be disturbed and will be enforced.
The employer petitioned to review a decision and order by the National Labor Relations Board, and the Board cross-applied for enforcement of its order…
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 Fashioning Remedies cases and more on FLexlaw
[*1294] PER CURIAM:
The Board’s Decision and Order is reported at 223 N.L.R.B. 317 (1976). The employer has filed a Petition to Review the Board’s Order, and the Board cross-applies for the Order’s enforcement.
The facts giving rise to the controversy are fully set forth in the Decision of the Administrative Law Judge, included as a portion of the Board’s Decision and Order. The legal conclusions of the Administrative Law Judge, adopted by the Board, with two modifications not here material, appear in the Board’s Decision and Order, supra, at 320.
While the employer’s arguments are persuasive, we are not persuaded that the Board’s Order should be disturbed. In United Ass’n of Journeymen & A., etc. v. N.L.R.B., 553 F. 2d 1202, 1205 (9th Cir. 1977), we wrote:
We have recently reiterated that “[t]he Board’s discretion in fashioning remedies which can be fairly said to ‘effectuate the policies’ of the Act is broad.” NLRB v. International Longshoremen’s and Warehousemen’s Union, Local No. 13, 549 F. 2d 1346, 1354 (9th Cir. 1977). Furthermore, the Board’s use of a back pay remedy will not be disturbed in the absence of clear abuse of discretion. Id., citing Virginia Electric and Power Co. v. NLRB, 319 U.S. 533, 540, 63 S.Ct. 1214, 87 L.Ed. 1568 (1943).”
The employers’ Petition to Review is rejected, and, upon the Board’s cross-application, the Board’s Order will be
ENFORCED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. W. Clinical Lab., Inc., 571 F.2d 457 (9th Cir. 1978)
-
United States v. Wheeler, 800 F.2d 100 (7th Cir. 1986)
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. LEE Off. Equip., 572 F.2d 704 (9th Cir. 1978)
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Va. Elec. & Power Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 319 U.S. 533 (U.S. 1943)
- Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l Longshoremen's & Warehousemen's Union, 549 F.2d 1346 (9th Cir. 1977)
- United Ass'n OF Journeymen & Apprentices OF Plumbing & Pipe Fitting Indus. OF THE United States & Canada v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 553 F.2d 1202 (9th Cir. 1977)