National Labor Relations Board v. Affiliated Food Stores, Inc.

353 F.2d 287, 60 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2512, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 3807
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit·Decided December 1, 1965·No. 22060_1·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

There being an abundance of evidence to support the Board decision that Respondent violated Section 8(a) (3) and (1) of the Act, 29 U.S.C.A. Section 158 (a) (3) and (1), in discharging employee Gordy, the order insofar as it is based on his discharge will be enforced.

The absence of substantial evidence to support the claimed Section 8(a) (1) violation, 29 U.S.C.A., Section 158(a) (1), based on the interrogation of employee Calloway requires that we deny enforcement of the order as it relates to this conduct. The evidence falls far short of that in N. L. R. B. v. Harbinson-Fisher Manufacturing Co., (5 Cir. 1962) 304 F.2d 738, and that case, we think, represents the outerlimits of the application of interference as it is proscribed in Section 8(a) (1) of the Act. The circumstances of the questioning tended toward coercion there but not here.

Enforced in part; denied in part.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

National Labor Relations Board v. Affiliated Food Stores, Inc., 353 F.2d 287, 60 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2512, 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 3807 (5th Cir. 1965).

353 F.2d 287 (National Labor Relations Board v. Affiliated Food Stores, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related