Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, PETITIONER, CROSS-RESPONDENT, AND LOCAL 1199, DRUG AND HOSPITAL UNION, RWDSU, AFL-CIO, INTERVENOR, v. HENRY BOOK ET AL., D/B/A SPRAIN BROOK MANOR, RESPONDENTS, CROSS-PETITIONERS.

PER CURIAM:

On this petition for enforcement and cross-petition for review, the respondent contends that the National Labor Relations Board erred in holding (two members dissenting) that Sprain Brook Manor violated §§ 8(a)(1), (2), and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 158(a)(1), (2), and (3), by recognizing — and entering into a collective bargaining agreement with — a union that did not represent a majority of the Manor's employees. Although Joseph Wildebush, an arbitrator selected by the union and the Manor without the consent of the employees, concluded after a "card check" that a majority of the workers had authorized the union to represent them, most of the Manor's employees later testified to the contrary at a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.

Twenty-five of the Manor's 101 employees testified orally. The parties stipulated that another 45 employees were prepared to testify "that they did not sign a card for [the union] or in any other way authorize [the union] to represent them . . .."

For the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of the National Labor Relations Board, ___ NLRB ___ (1975), we grant enforcement of the Board's order. The cross-petition for review is denied.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

N.L.R.B. v. BOOK
(Apr 5, 1976)