granting petition for review and remanding where Board failed 17 to explain why employer’s “history of many years of obstinance” did not “warrant the broader relief that the Union ha[d] requested”
How later courts described this case
- granting petition for review and remanding where Board failed 17 to explain why employer’s “history of many years of obstinance” did not “warrant the broader relief that the Union ha[d] requested”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
TAMM, Circuit Judge,
dissenting:
I would affirm the action of the Board in this case. It is my view that the Board has acted completely within its legal authority and power under § 10(c) of the National Labor Relations Act, under which section the Board’s power is a “broad discretionary one, subject to limited judicial review.” Fibreboard Paper Products Corp. v. NLRB, 379 U.S. 203, 216 , 85 S.Ct. 398, 406 , 13 L.Ed.2d 233 (1964).