National Labor Relations Board v. Federated Publications, Inc. D/B/A the State Journal

544 F.2d 908, 93 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2877, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 6305
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedNovember 10, 1976
Docket75-1928
StatusPublished

This text of 544 F.2d 908 (National Labor Relations Board v. Federated Publications, Inc. D/B/A the State Journal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth 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. Federated Publications, Inc. D/B/A the State Journal, 544 F.2d 908, 93 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2877, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 6305 (6th Cir. 1976).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This case is before the court on the application of the National Labor Relations Board for enforcement of its order issued against respondent on June 2,1975. Reference is made to the decision and order of the Board at 218 N.L.R.B. No. 20 for a recitation of pertinent facts.

The Board held that the newspaper’s “contract haulers” were employees rather than independent contractors. We conclude that this holding of the Board is supported by substantial evidence on the record as a whole. Universal Camera Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 340 U.S. 474, 71 S.Ct. 456, 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951); Aetna Freight Lines v. N. L. R. B., 520 F.2d 928, 930 (6th Cir. 1975); N. L. R. B. v. Pepsi Cola Bottling Co., 455 F.2d 1134 (6th Cir. 1972); The News Journal Company v. N. L. R. B., 447 F.2d 65 (3rd Cir. 1971), cert. denied, 404 U.S. 1016, 92 S.Ct. 676, 30 L.Ed.2d 664 (1972); Maxwell Company v. N. L. R. B., 414 F.2d 477, 481 (6th Cir. 1969).

There is also substantial evidence on the record as a whole to support the conclusion of the Board that the Company violated §§ 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act by discharging all its “contract haulers” and that a bargaining order is an appropriate remedy. N. L. R. B. v. Gissell Packing Co., Inc., 395 U.S. 575, 89 S.Ct. 1918, 23 L.Ed.2d 547 (1969).

The Company contends that the Board’s unit determination is without an articulated rationale, and constitutes an abuse of discretion. We conclude that this contention is not supported by the record.

Enforcement granted.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
544 F.2d 908, 93 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2877, 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 6305, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-labor-relations-board-v-federated-publications-inc-dba-the-ca6-1976.