NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
v.
MATTISON MACHINE WORKS
Per Curiam.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the case remanded to that court for the entry of a decree enforcing the Board’s order. The refusal of the Court of Appeals to enforce that order because the Board’s notices of election contained a minor and unconfusing mistake in the employer’s corporate name, was plain error. It was well within the Board’s province to find, as it did, upon the record before it that this occurrence had not affected the fairness of the representation election, particularly in the absence of any contrary showing by the employer, upon whom the burden of proof rested in this respect. That finding should have been accepted by the Court of Appeals. In the absence of proof by the employer that there has been prejudice to the fairness of the election such trivial irregularities of administrative procedure do not afford a basis for denying enforcement to an otherwise valid Board order.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (51 total)
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Bata Shoe Co., Inc., 377 F.2d 821 (4th Cir. 1967)…ng Mfg. Co., 207 F. 2d 98, 100 (3d Cir. 1953). It is settled that the burden is on the party objecting to the conduct of a representation election to prove that there has been prejudice to the fairness of the election. NLRB v. Mattison Mach. Works, 365 U.S. 123, 81 S.Ct. 434, 5 L.Ed.2d 455 (1961). And in order to be entitled to a hearing on its objections to an election the objecting party must make a proffer of evidence “which prima facie would warrant setting aside the election.” NLRB v. O.K. Van Storage…
-
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Sumter Plywood Corp., 535 F.2d 917 (5th Cir. 1976)…THE ELECTION At the outset we note that, as a general rule, the burden is on the party seeking to overturn a Board-conducted representation election to establish that the election was not fairly conducted. N.L.R.B. v. Mattison Machine Works, 1961, 365 U.S. 123, 124, 81 S.Ct. 434, 5 L.Ed.2d 455. The question of whether challenged conduct tended to interfere with employees’ free choice is one primarily left to the Board’s discretion. N.L.R.B. v. A. J. Tower, 1946, 329 U.S. 324, 330, 67 S.Ct. 324, 91 L.Ed. 3…1 / 2
-
Home Town Foods, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 379 F.2d 241 (5th Cir. 1967)…as unlawful and ordered bargaining. The Board affirmed. Hence the case reached us. Where a party seeks to overturn the result of an election, the burden is on him to show that the election was unfairly conducted. NLRB v. Mattison Mach. Works, 1961, 365 U.S. 123, 81 S.Ct. 434, 5 L.Ed.2d 455; NLRB v. Huntsville Mfg. Co., 5 Cir., 1953, 203 F. 2d 430. On this record we do not feel warranted in declaring the election invalid. We thoroughly realize, however, that the employer, without the aid of a hearing in whi…
Previewing 3 of 51 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence