Opinion

National Labor Relations Board, and v. Spranger Spring Company, And

  • 309 F.2d 139
  • 51 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2374
  • 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 3813
Court
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
Filed
Oct 29, 1962
Status
Published
On the bench
Miller, Weick, Peck
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

PER CURIAM.

The only question in this case is whether the Board’s order was supported by substantial evidence. The Board found that the employer coerced its employees in violation of Section 8(a) (1) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended ( 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq.) by interrogating them concerning their union activities and sympathies, by threatening to close the plant and by granting -wage increases which were intended to discourage union activity. The Board further found that the discharge of the employees Edward Cackowski and Adam Kreuzwieser was on account of their union membership and activities and violated the Act.

The Trial Examiner, whose intermediate report appears on forty-eight pages of the printed record, gave careful consideration to the conflicting evidence in the case. The Board’s order was in conformity with his findings. On the basis of the evidence which he credited, we think substantially existed. We are, therefore, required to enforce the Board’s order.

Enforcement granted.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.