National Labor Relations Board v. Bradenton Coca-Cola Bottling Company, Also D/B/A Sarasota Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Sarasota, Florida

402 F.2d 84, 69 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2522, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 5166
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedOctober 23, 1968
Docket25320
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 402 F.2d 84 (National Labor Relations Board v. Bradenton Coca-Cola Bottling Company, Also D/B/A Sarasota Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Sarasota, Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
National Labor Relations Board v. Bradenton Coca-Cola Bottling Company, Also D/B/A Sarasota Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Sarasota, Florida, 402 F.2d 84, 69 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2522, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 5166 (5th Cir. 1968).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The record before the National Labor Relations Board fully supported the finding by the Board that the respondent did not carry out its duty “to meet and confer with the Union at reasonable times and intervals” in an effort to arrive at a contract. See NLRB v. Exchange Parts Co. (5 Cir. 1965) 339 F.2d 829. Such failure warranted the Board’s finding a violation of Section 8(a) (1) and 8(a) (5) of the National Labor Relations Act.

There is no merit in the respondent’s contention that the duty to bargain ceased when a subsequent decertification petition was filed. The Board concluded that the unfair labor practice had taken place long before the filing of such petition. We conclude that the record fully supports this finding.

Finally, we do not believe the order entered by the Board was too broad in requiring respondent to cease and desist from “in any like or related manner interfering with, restraining or coercing its employees in the exercise of their right to self-organization.” This order does not have the defects contained in the order in NLRB v. Express Publishing Company, 312 U.S. 426, 61 S.Ct. 693, 85 L.Ed. 930. Rather it falls within the language of the Court’s conclusion that it was appropriate to restrain the practice and “other like or related unlawful acts.” See 312 U.S. 426, 436, 61 S.Ct. 693, 700.

The Order will be enforced.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
402 F.2d 84, 69 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2522, 1968 U.S. App. LEXIS 5166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-labor-relations-board-v-bradenton-coca-cola-bottling-company-ca5-1968.