Campbell Soup Company v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
| Decision Date | 21 June 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 23769.,23769. |
| Parties | CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY, Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
George E. Seay, Dallas, Tex., Robert McWhirter, Paris, Tex., McWhirter & Braswell, Paris, Tex., Malone, Seay & Gwinn, Dallas, Tex., of counsel, for petitioner.
Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Frank H. Itkin, Atty., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Nancy M. Sherman, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D. C., for respondent.
Before BELL, GODBOLD, and DYER, Circuit Judges.
This case comes to us on the petition of Campbell Soup Company to set aside the Board's order, and on the cross petition of the Board to enforce the order.
Campbell asserts that it was denied procedural due process in several respects by the Trial Examiner. We find no merit in these contentions. There is also ample support in the record considered as a whole to support the findings that Campbell violated § 8(a) (1) of the Act, 29 U.S.C.A. § 158(a) (1), by interrogating and threatening employees with regard to their union activity. The portion of the order relating to these violations will be enforced.
The order deals, in addition, with a company rule relating to the distribution of written or printed material in the plant and on company property, and with another rule governing the unauthorized solicitation for contributions, memberships or sales during company working hours. The Board concluded that these rules were overbroad in the area of union activity to the extent that they prohibited distribution or solicitation during a particular employee's non-working time, and in parts of the plant set aside for breaks, lunchrooms or rest rooms. Both rules were held invalid. Cf. Republic Aviation Corp. v. N.L.R.B., 1945, 324 U.S. 793, 65 S.Ct. 982, 89 L.Ed. 1372; Brewton Fashions, Inc. v. N.L. R.B., 5 Cir., 1966, 361 F.2d 8; N.L.R.B. v. Mira-Pak, Inc., 5 Cir., 1965, 354 F.2d 525; N.L.R.B. v. Southwire Company, 5 Cir., 1965, 352 F.2d 346; N.L.R.B. v. Plant City Steel Corporation, 5 Cir., 1964, 331 F.2d 511; N.L.R.B. v. Linda Jo Shoe Company, 5 Cir., 1962, 307 F.2d 355; and N.L.R.B. v. Walton Manufacturing Company, 5 Cir., 1961, 289 F.2d 177.
The rule relating to the distribution of written or printed material here is not a model of clarity but, nevertheless, it does not prohibit employees, on non-working time, from distributing material in behalf of a labor...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cramco, Inc. v. NLRB
...is not related to James C. Jones, mentioned supra, whose discharge is the subject of part II of this opinion. 3 See Campbell Soup Co. v. NLRB, 5 Cir. 1967, 380 F.2d 372; NLRB v. Whitfield Pickle Co., 5 Cir., 1967, 374 F.2d 576, 578-579. See also Republic Aluminum Co. v. NLRB, 5 Cir. 1967, 3......
-
NLRB v. WKRG-TV, Inc.
...it demonstrates the potential for employer abuse inherent in a no-solicitation rule of uncertain dimensions. See Campbell Soup Co. v. N.L.R. B., 5 Cir. 1967, 380 F.2d 372. See generally, Derishinsky, The Solicitation and Distribution Rules of the N.L.R.B., 40 U.Cin.L.Rev. 417 (1971). The ru......
-
Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. v. N.L.R.B., 90-4892
...is the progeny of various phrases, which have caused much confusion and controversy over the past few decades. In Campbell Soup Co. v. N.L.R.B., 380 F.2d 372 (5th Cir.1967), we held invalid for vagueness and indefiniteness a ban on solicitation during "Company working hours." 7 A prohibitio......
-
Florida Steel Corp. v. N.L.R.B.
...n. 10, 89 L.Ed. at 1379, 1380, n. 10. We are confronted with a rule barring solicitation 'on the Company's time.' In Campbell Soup Co. v. NLRB, 380 F.2d 372 (5th Cir. 1967), we held invalid for vagueness and indefiniteness a ban on soliciation during 'Company working hours.' A prohibition a......