Opinion

National Labor Relations Board, and Local 1199, Drug and Hospital Union, Rwdsu, Afl-Cio, Intervenor v. Henry Book, D/B/A Sprain Brook Manor

  • 532 F.2d 877
  • 92 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2001
  • 1976 U.S. App. LEXIS 11960
Court
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Filed
Apr 5, 1976
Status
Published
On the bench
Kaufman, Oakes, Gurfein
Cited by
4 cases
Authority
More cited than 55.2%

The opinion

PER CURIAM:

On this petition for enforcement and cross-petition for review, the respondent contends that the National Labor Relations Board erred in holding (two members dissenting) that Sprain Brook Manor .violated §§ 8(a)(1), (2), and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 158 (a)(1), (2), and (3), by recognizing — and entering into a collective bargaining agreement with — a union that did not represent a majority of the Manor’s employees. Although Joseph Wildebush, an arbitrator selected by the union and the Manor without the consent of the employees, concluded after a “card check” that a majority of the workers had authorized the union to represent them, most of the Manor’s employees later testified

1

to the contrary at a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge.

For the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of the National Labor Relations Board, - NLRB - (1975), we grant enforcement of the Board’s order. The cross-petition for review is denied.

1

. Twenty-five of the Manor’s 101 employees testified orally. The parties stipulated that another 45 employees were prepared to testify “that they did not sign a card for [the union] or in any other way authorize [the union] to represent them . . . .”

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.