Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Enterprise Ass'n of Steam, Hot Water, Hydraulic Sprinkler, Pneumatic Tube, Ice Machine & General Pipefitters of New York & Vicinity, Local Union No. 638 v. National Labor Relations Board

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided July 1, 1975No. 73-1764Published

1ConcurrenceBazelon, Chief Judge

I concur in Part III of the Court’s opinion, in the bulk of its reasoning and in its judgment that the Board’s “right to control” test is inconsistent with National Woodwork Manufacturing Association v. NLRB, 386 U.S. 612, 87 S.Ct. 1250, 18 L.Ed.2d 357 (1967). My path to this conclusion makes it unnecessary for me to consider certain issues raised by the Board in its argument1 and considered in the Court’s opinion.

I

The central dilemma presented by § 8(b)(4) is well known and needs no extended recital. The section purports to prohibit any inducement to force an employer “to cease doing…

2Cases cited42 opinions

  1. United Mine Workers v. PenningtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
  2. Local 174, Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers v. Lucas Flour Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Board of Trade of Chicago v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
  4. National Labor Relations Board v. Denver Building & Construction Trades CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
  5. International Ass'n of MacHinists v. StreetSupreme Court of the United States · 1961

37 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API