S & W Motor Lines, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board, and Teamsters Local Union No. 391, Intervenor
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partK. K. Hall, Circuit Judge
I
I do not agree with the majority that an employer, caught up in the throes of economic uncertainty associated with a strike, should not be forced to raise a “foredoomed” issue for bargaining unless the alleged violation under § 8(a)(1) “is incontestable from the very outset.” While the purpose behind this holding is apparently to protect employers from being punished twice, under both § 8(a)(1) and (5), for the good faith implementation of purportedly legal wage payments, I think this misconstrues the rationale underlying both NLRB v. Rubatex, 601 F.2d 147 (4th Cir. 1979), and Aero-Motive…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- National Labor Relations Board v. Acme Industrial Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Curtiss-Wright Corporation, Wright Aeronautical Division v. National Labor Relations BoardCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1965
- Cone Mills Corporation v. National Labor Relations BoardCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1969
- National Labor Relations Board v. Whitin MacHine WorksCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1954
- National Labor Relations Board v. Rubatex CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1979
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.