National Labor Relations Board v. Heck's, Inc.

387 F.2d 65, 67 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2078, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 4255
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in National Labor Relations Board v. Heck's, Inc.. Read the opinion of the Court — 386 F.2d 317
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit·Decided December 7, 1967·No. 11391·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

Examination of the record as a whole reveals a substantial factual basis to support the Board’s determination that the Company violated section 8(a) (1) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S. C.A. § 158(a) (1), in the manner in which it individually polled its employees to determine if, in fact, the union had attained majority representation. The record sustains the Board’s finding that its approved procedure in such circumstances was not followed in that the company representatives conducting the poll gave no assurances that there would be no reprisals against the employees regardless of their answers to company interrogators concerning union affiliation and membership. See Blue Flash Express, 109 N.L.R.B. 591. We agree that under these circumstances the poll created an “aroma of coercion” condemned by the Act. Joy Silk Mills v. N. L. R. B„ 87 U.S.App.D.C. 360, 185 F.2d 732, 740 (1950), cert. denied, 341 U.S. 914, 71 S.Ct. 734, 95 L.Ed. 1350 (1951). Therefore, the Board’s order will be enforced.

Enforcement granted.

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

National Labor Relations Board v. Heck's, Inc., 387 F.2d 65, 67 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2078, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 4255 (4th Cir. 1967).

387 F.2d 65 (National Labor Relations Board v. Heck's, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related