Conair Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board, Local 222, International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, Afl-Cio, Intervenor
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1DissentWald, Circuit Judge
I dissent. I believe that the Board had authority under the National Labor Relations Act to order bargaining with the Union based upon its findings, accepted by the majority of this panel, that no other remedy could “dissipate the lingering effects of [Co-nair’s] massive and unrelenting coercive conduct” which “has foreclosed any possibility of holding a fair representation election,” and that “a remedial bargaining order is the only way to restore to employees their statutory right to make a free and uncoerced determination whether they wish to be represented in collective bargaining by a…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of EducationSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Regents of the University of California v. BakkeSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- National Labor Relations Board v. Gissel Packing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1969
- National Labor Relations Board v. KatzSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
- Fullilove v. KlutznickSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.