# National Labor Relations Board v. Big Three Industrial Gas & Equipment Co.

> Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · October 27, 1978 · 579 F.2d 304

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9464909

## Case

- **Full name:** NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. BIG THREE INDUSTRIAL GAS & EQUIPMENT CO., Respondent
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
- **Decided:** October 27, 1978
- **Citations:** 579 F.2d 304
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Gee
- **Judges:** Morgan, Gee, King
- **Cited by:** 27 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/9464909

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that status of a low-level supervisor does not in itself negate liability
- noting that "[f]riends can unlawfully threaten their friends" and "[Wa]rnings of Company retaliation cast as friendly advice from a familiar associate might be more credible, hence, more offensive to § 8(a)(1)"
- noting that “[fjriends can unlawfully threaten their friends” and “[Wa]rnings of Company retaliation cast as friendly advice from a familiar associate might be more credible, hence, more offensive to § 8(a)(1)”
- finding that status of *565 a low-level supervisor does not in itself negate liability

## Opinion text

GEE, Circuit Judge,
Specially Concurring:
I concur in the result and in all of the court’s opinion save its ascertaining of a “complete absence of anti-union animus” as a factor which distinguishes this from the Johns-Manville situation. 1 In the first place I do not think there was such a complete absence in Johns-Manville; an employer who gives as some of his reasons for a lock-out “the Union’s unreasonable demands, unresponsive attitude and willful acts, as well as [a] history of sabotage” as did Johns-Manville (557 F.2d at 1131) seems to me to be rather clearly evidencing some animus against the union. In the second, I think it somewhat unrealistic to expect employers under the sort of attack evidenced by the facts of Johns-Manville to preserve an entire absence of anti-union animus. If this be made a condition of relief, only saints will receive it.
. Johns-Manville Products Corp. v. N. L. R. B., 557 F.2d 1126 (5th Cir. 1977).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9464909. Public record. Not legal advice.