Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Heck's, Inc., 387 F.2d 65 (4th Cir. 1967). · Go Syfert
Search
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Heck's, Inc., 387 F.2d 65 (4th Cir. 1967). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
14 citation events across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: National Labor Relations Board v. Harry F. Berggren & Sons, Inc. (ca8, 1969-01-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" National Labor Relations Board v. Harry F. Berggren & Sons, Inc. (2×)
8th Cir. · 1969 · signal: see · confidence high
See, N.L.R.B. v. Heck's, Inc., 387 F.2d 65 (4 Cir. 1967). 26 With regard to the alleged discriminatory discharge issue, the observation of this Court in N.L.R.B. v. Twin Table & Furniture Co., 308 F.2d 686 (8 Cir. 1962) is appropriate: 27 'Unless a controversy between the National Labor Relations Board and an employer as to the enforceability of an order of the Board resulting from conventional proceedings before it, presents some novel or unusual problem, a detailed discussion of the facts and the law is ordinarily profitless'. 28 The pertinent facts here may be summarized briefly.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner,
v.
HECK’S, INC., Respondent
11391.
Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit.
Dec 7, 1967.
387 F.2d 65
Burton L. Raimi, Attorney, N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, and Herman M. Levy, Attorney, N. L. R. B., on brief), for petitioner., Frederick F. Holroyd, Charleston, W. Va., for respondent.
Boreman, Butzner, Jones.
Published
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.