Pacific Electricord Company v. National Labor Relations Board

Ninth Circuit

Pacific Electricord Company v. National Labor Relations Board

361 F.2d 310, 63 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2064, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6380

Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit·Decided April 26, 1966·No. 20276·Published·Cited by 15 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Upon an examination of the whole record we conclude that there was substantial evidence from which the Board could infer that the activities leading to the employee’s discharge were engaged in with or on behalf of other employees, and not solely by and on behalf of the discharged employee himself, and thus were “concerted activities for the purpose of * * mutual aid or protection” within the meaning of section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, protected by section 8 (a) (1) of the Act.

The order of the Board will be enforced.

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

PER CURIAM.

Upon an examination of the whole record we conclude that there was substantial evidence from which the Board could infer that the activities leading to the employee’s discharge were engaged in with or on behalf of other employees, and not solely by and on behalf of the discharged employee himself, and thus were “concerted activities for the purpose of * * mutual aid or protection” within the meaning of section 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, protected by section 8 (a) (1) of the Act.

The order of the Board will be enforced.

Pacific Electricord Company v. National Labor Relations Board, 361 F.2d 310, 63 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2064, 1966 U.S. App. LEXIS 6380 (9th Cir. 1966).

Pincite

361 F.2d 310 (Pacific Electricord Company v. National Labor Relations Board) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related