# International Union of Electrical, Radio & Machine Workers v. National Labor Relations Board

> Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · December 23, 1970 · 440 F.2d 298

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8885046

## Case

- **Full name:** INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ELECTRICAL, RADIO AND MACHINE WORKERS, AFL-CIO v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. TIIDEE PRODUCTS, INC.
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
- **Decided:** December 23, 1970
- **Citations:** 440 F.2d 298
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by MacKinnon
- **Judges:** MacKinnon
- **Cited by:** 1 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8885046

## Opinion text

MacKINNON, Circuit Judge
(concurring in part and dissenting in part):
I concur in the conclusion that the findings of the Board are sustained by satisfactory evidence, however I dissent as to the remand for further consideration by the Board as to the make-whole claim requested by the Union by way of additional remedial relief. First, the Board already has ample power under the remand by the majority in Tiidee I to grant all necessary remedial relief that is requested here; and secondly, in my opinion, this is not as strong a case as Tiidee I for the make-whole relief requested as there is not present here any general refusal to recognize and bargain with the certified union. In my view, the majority are remanding the case here on the remedial relief question principally because of the cumulative effect of the facts here when same are considered jointly with those in Tiidee I. I view this case strictly and solely on its own facts and would also affirm the Board’s denial of further remedial relief.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8885046. Public record. Not legal advice.