NLRB v. Brotherhood of Teamsters, etc., Local No. 70, 72-1498.
| Decision Date | 19 January 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 72-1498.,72-1498. |
| Citation | 470 F.2d 509 |
| Parties | NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS AND AUTO TRUCK DRIVERS LOCAL NO. 70, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, CHAUFFEURS, WAREHOUSEMEN & HELPERS OF AMERICA, Respondent, and California Trucking Association, Inc., Intervenor. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
John M. Flynn (argued), Baruch A. Fellner, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Peter G. Nash, Gen. Counsel, Washington, D. C., Roy O. Hoffman, Director, Region 20, NLRB, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner.
Victor J. Van Bourg (argued), Michael B. Roger, of Levy & Van Bourg, San Francisco, Cal., for respondent.
Wesley J. Fastiff (argued), of Littler, Mendelson & Fastiff, San Francisco, Cal., for intervenor.
Before DUNIWAY and TRASK, Circuit Judges, and TALBOT SMITH,* Senior District Judge.
The Board's Order before us was based upon its finding that respondent union had violated Sections 8(b)(3) and 8(b)(1)(B) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, 29 U.S.C. § 151 et seq. It was the determination of the Board that the respondent union, a member of a multi-union-multi-employer unit, had unlawfully refused to bargain by refusing to be bound by the negotiations of its representatives, such action "coming after negotiations for a new contract had been all but completed."1 It had, moreover, it was found, by strikes, picketing, and threats thereof, sought to compel employer-members of the unit to abandon the unit and to execute separate collective bargaining agreements.
The offenses charged do not turn upon the existence or nonexistence of a new national agreement, whether signed or unsigned, executed or executory, but rather upon the attempted withdrawal from the unit under the circumstances described and the concomitant restraint and coercion practiced. See NLRB v. Jeffries Banknote Co., 281 F.2d 893 (CA 9, 1960); NLRB v. Hart, 453 F.2d 215 (CA 9, 1971).
We have reviewed the record and find substantial support therein to support the Board's factual determinations. The Petition of Enforcement is therefore granted and the Board's Order will be enforced.
* The Honorable Talbot Smith, Senior United States Judge for the Eastern District of Michigan, sitting by designation.
1 1972 CCH NLRB ¶ 23,733. The Board's Decision and Order is reported at 194 NLRB No. 106.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Charles Bonanno Linen Service, Inc v. National Labor Relations Board
...434 U.S. 1065, 98 S.Ct. 1240, 55 L.Ed.2d 766 (1978); NLRB v. Central Plumbing Co., 492 F.2d 1252 (CA6 1974); NLRB v. Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local No. 70, 470 F.2d 509 (CA9 1972), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 821, 94 S.Ct. 117, 38 L.Ed.2d 54 (1973); NLRB v. Johnson Sheet Metal, Inc., 442 F.2d 1......
-
California Trucking Ass'n v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers, Local 70
...revisions, such as those involving the grievance machinery, became effective on May 18, 1970.4 NLRB v. Brotherhood of Teamsters & Auto Truck Drivers, 470 F.2d 509 (9th Cir. 1972), cert. denied, 414 U.S. 821, 94 S.Ct. 117, 38 L.Ed.2d 54 (1973).5 Local 70 also asserts that the retroactivity o......
-
N.L.R.B. v. Associated Shower Door Co., Inc.
...from such bargaining without the consent of the opposing party, absent unusual circumstances. See NLRB v. Brotherhood of Teamsters, etc., Local No. 70, 470 F.2d 509, 509-510 (9th Cir. 1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 821, 94 S.Ct. 117, 38 L.Ed.2d 54 (1973); NLRB v. Hart, 453 F.2d 215, 217-218 (......
-
H & D, Inc. v. N.L.R.B.
...512 F.2d 230, 232 (9th Cir. 1975), cert. denied 423 U.S. 893, 96 S.Ct. 191, 46 L.Ed.2d 125 (1975); NLRB v. Brotherhood of Teamsters etc., Local No. 70, 470 F.2d 509 (9th Cir. 1972), cert. denied 414 U.S. 821, 94 S.Ct. 117, 38 L.Ed.2d 54 (1973); Retail Associates, Inc., 120 N.L.R.B. 388 (195......