Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 308 U.S. 413 (1940). · Go Syfert
Search
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, 308 U.S. 413 (1940). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
197 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 24 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Intertape Polymer Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board (ca4, 2015-09-08)
Treatment trajectory · 1940 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1940 1983 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited as authority (rule) Intertape Polymer Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board (3×)
4th Cir. · 2015 · confidence medium
Workers, 308 U.S. 413, 414 (1940).
examined Cited "see" Prairie Tank Southern, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board (3×)
7th Cir. · 1983 · signal: see · confidence high
See NLRB v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, 308 U.S. 413 , 60 S.Ct. 306 , 84 L.Ed. 354 (1940)).
examined Cited "see" United Dairy Farmers Cooperative Association, in No. 79-1807 v. National Labor Relations Board, Teamsters Local Union No. 205, Intervenor. Teamsters Local Union No. 205, in No. 79-1883 v. National Labor Relations Board, United Dairy Farmers Cooperative Association, Intervenor (3×)
3rd Cir. · 1980 · signal: see · confidence high
See NLRB v. I.B.E.W., 308 U.S. 413, 414-15 , 60 S.Ct. 306, 306-307 , 84 L.Ed. 354 (1940); Local 542, Int'l Union of Operating Engineers v. NLRB, 328 F.2d 850, 853-4 (3d Cir. 1964) 8 United Dairy appears to argue on appeal that since it was successful in converting the status of the drivers to independent contractors, see NLRB v. A. Duie Pyle, 606 F.2d 379 (3d Cir. 1979) (discussing requirement for independent contractors status), it has not committed a violation of the Act.
examined Cited "see" United Dairy Farmers Cooperative Ass'n v. National Labor Relations Board (3×)
3rd Cir. · 1980 · signal: see · confidence high
See NLRB v. I.B.E.W., 308 U.S. 413, 414-15 , 60 S.Ct. 306, 306-307 , 84 L.Ed. 354 (1940); Local 542, Int’l Union of Operating Engineers v. NLRB, 328 F.2d 850, 853-4 (3d Cir. 1964). .
examined Cited "see" Bricklayers, Masons & Plasterers International Union v. National Labor Relations Board (3×)
D.C. Cir. · 1973 · signal: accord · confidence high
Accord, NLRB v. International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, 308 U.S. 413 , 60 S.Ct. 306 , 84 L.Ed. 354 (1940). .
examined Cited "see" Consumers Power Co. v. National Labor Relations Board (3×)
6th Cir. · 1940 · signal: see · confidence high
See International Brotherhood et al. v. National Labor Relations Board, 6 Cir., 105 F.2d 598 , National Labor Relations Board v. International Brotherhood, 308 U.S. 413 , 60 S.Ct. 306 , 84 L.Ed. 354 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
v.
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS Et Al.
253.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Jan 2, 1940.
308 U.S. 413
1940 U.S. LEXIS 1188
Mr. Charles Fahy, with whom Solicitor General Jackson and Messrs. Robert B. Watts and Laurence A. Knapp were on the brief, for petitioner. ', Messrs. John B. Hollister and Isaac Lobe Straus, with whom Mr. Sigmund Levin was on the brief, for respondents.
Stone.
Cited by 68 opinions  |  Published
Mr. Justice Stone

delivered the opinion of the Court.

This is a companion case to American Federation of Labor v. National Labor Relations Board, ante, p. 401. The decisive- question raised by the petition is whether a direction for an election made by the National Labor Relations Board in a representation proceeding under § 9 (c) of the Wagner Act, 49 Stat. 449, 453, 29 U. S. C., Supp. IV, §§ 151-166, is reviewable by a circuit court of appeals under § 10 (f) of the Act.

[*414] In February, 1938, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers, Local 876, one of the respondents, and an affiliate of respondent, American Federation of Labor, filed with the regional director of the Board a petition asking an investigation and the certification of a representative, for purposes of collective bargaining, of the employees of Consumers Power Company, pursuant to § 9 (c) of the Act. After a hearing,' in which the petitioner, the employer, and the Utility Workers Organizing Committee, an affiliate of the Congress of Industrial Organization, participatéd, the Board issued a “decision and direction of election.” 9 N. L. R. B. 742. At the election in January, 1939, 2,806 of the total 2,977 employees voted. Of these 1,072 voted for I. B. E. W. and 1,164 voted for U. W. O. C.

After further proceedings and a hearing the Board found “that the question concerning'representation which has arisen can best be resolved by the holding of a run-off election in which the employees in the appropriate unit will be given the opportunity to decide whether or not they desire to be represented by U. W. O. C.” and made its “direction” accordingly. 11 N. L. R. B. 848.

Contending that the direction, contrary to law, excludes Union 876 from the ballot on the run-off election, respondents petitioned the Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit to review the direction under the provisions of § 10 (f) of the Act. ' That court set aside the direction as infringing the free choice by employees of their representatives for purposes of collective bargaining assured to them by §§ 1, 7, 9 (a) and(c) of the Wagner Act. ,We granted certiorari October 9, 1939, so that the case might be considered with American Federation of Labor v. National Labor Relations Board, supra.

Decision here is controlled by our decision in that case. The direction for an election is but a part of the repre[*415] sentation proceeding authorized by § 9 (c) and is no more subject to review under § 10 (f) than is a certification which is the final step in such a proceeding and which we have just held Congress has excluded from the review afforded by that subdivisión.

Reversed.