# National Labor Relations Board v. Erie Resistor Corp.

> Supreme Court of the United States · May 13, 1963 · 373 U.S. 221

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9422597

## Case

- **Full name:** NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD v. ERIE RESISTOR CORP. Et Al.
- **Court:** Supreme Court of the United States
- **Decided:** May 13, 1963
- **Citations:** 373 U.S. 221; 94 A.L.R. 2d 1147; 53 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2121; 83 S. Ct. 1139; 10 L. Ed. 2d 308; 1963 U.S. LEXIS 2492
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Harlan
- **Judges:** White, Harlan
- **Cited by:** 474 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/9422597

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that an employer cannot grant discretionary pay increases prior to impasse without bargaining with the union over their size
- noting that courts must afford appropriate deference to the Board's expertise in "applying the general provisions of the Act to the complexities of industrial life"
- noting that “[t]he employer ... must be held to intend the very consequences which foreseeably and inescapably flow from his actions”

## Opinion text

Mr. Justice Harlan,
concurring.
I agree with the Court that the Board’s conclusions respecting this 20-year “superseniority” plan were justified without inquiry into the respondents’ motives. However, I do not think that the same thing would necessarily be true in all circumstances, as for. example with a plan providing for a much shorter period of extra seniority. Being unsure whether the Court intends to hold that the Board has power to outlaw all such plans, irrespective of the employer’s motives and other circumstances, or only to sustain its action in the particular circumstances of this case, I concur in the judgment.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9422597. Public record. Not legal advice.