Opinion

Kohler Company v. National Labor Relations Board

  • 345 F.2d 748
  • 120 U.S. App. D.C. 259
  • 58 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2847
  • 1965 U.S. App. LEXIS 5859
Court
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Filed
Apr 20, 1965
Status
Published
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 49.1%

The opinion

345 F.2d 748

120 U.S.App.D.C. 259

KOHLER COMPANY, Petitioner,

v.

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent.

Local 833, UAW-AFL-CIO, International Union, United

Automobile, Aircraft& Agricultural Implement

Workers of America, Intervenor.

No. 18961.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued April 6, 1965.

Decided April 20, 1965.

Mr. Lyman C. Conger, Kohler, Wis., with whom Messrs. Edward J. Hammer, Kohler, Wis., and E. Riley Casey, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for petitioner.

Mrs. Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B., with whom Messrs. Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Paul J. Spielberg, Atty., N.L.R.B., were on the brief, for respondent.

Mr. Joseph L. Rauh, Jr., Washington, D.C., with whom Messrs. John Silard and Stephen, I. Schlossberg, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for intervenor.

Before BAZELON, Chief Judge, and EDGERTON and WILBUR K. MILLER, Senior Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

1

In a former appeal 1 we enforced in large part a previous Board order, but remanded the case to the Board for further consideration of two questions: whether the strike was an unfair labor practice strike from its inception, and whether any of the 77 strikers denied reinstatement by the Board should be reinstated in light of the principles enunciated in National Labor Relations Board v. Thayer Co., 213 F.2d 748 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 348 U.S. 883 , 75 S.Ct. 123 , 99 L.Ed. 694 (1954). On remand the Board determined that the strike was an unfair labor practice from its inception, and that 57 of the 74 surviving strikers who had been denied reinstatement should be reinstated. Th Kohler Company petitions for review.

2

The Board properly applied the principles announced in our initial decision, and its determinations are supported by substantial evidence on the record viewed as a whole, Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board, 340 U.S. 474 , 71 S.Ct. 456 , 95 L.Ed. 456 (1951). The petition for review will be denied, and the Board's supplementary order enforced in full.

3

So ordered.

4

WILBUR K. MILLER, Senior Circuit Judge, dissents.

1

112 U.S.App.D.C. 107 , 300 F.2d 699 , cert. denied 370 U.S. 911 , 82 S.Ct. 1258 , 8 L.Ed.2d 405 (1962)

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.