# Burger King Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board

> Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · January 13, 1984 · 725 F.2d 1053

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9471676

## Case

- **Full name:** BURGER KING CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
- **Decided:** January 13, 1984
- **Citations:** 725 F.2d 1053; 115 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 2387; 1984 U.S. App. LEXIS 26438
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Engel
- **Judges:** Engel, Merritt, Morton
- **Cited by:** 24 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/9471676

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- noting that the challenged policy must be enforced in a "consistent and nondiscriminatory fashion"

## Opinion text

ENGEL, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
Although I fully agree that the Board was incorrect in finding the ban on *1056 buttons to have been a violation of the Act, I disagree with the majority’s treatment of the coercive questioning issue. While I believe that Barnhardt’s questions to Cynthia Williams about the union were, in the abstract, not coercive, the circumstances in which the conversation occurred provide substantial support for the Board’s findings of coercive effect. Those circumstances were: (a) Barnhardt was obviously part of the company management and had come to the particular outlet in response to the local manager’s call for help, and (b) his questioning came at a time when the restaurant was shut down because of the incident and emotions were still running high. Thus, the conditions surrounding the interrogation were very different from the circumstances in National Labor Relations Board v. Streamway Division of the Scott and Fetzer Co., 691 F.2d 288 (6th Cir.1982), cited by the majority. In Streamway, we found that the questioning concerning a union was not coercive because it was conducted “not by the Company but by a professional attitude survey company” and because the questions were asked in a relaxed atmosphere. Given the very different conditions in this case, I am unwilling to disturb the Board’s finding that such inquiries would tend to have a coercive effect upon the employees so questioned.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9471676. Public record. Not legal advice.