Raymond Interior Sys. v. NLRB, No. 12-1011 (D.C. Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseThe Carpenters Union and the Painters Union seek review of the Board's orders issued on September 30, 2010, contending that the Board’s findings with respect to the October 2, 2006 unfair labor practices are not supported by substantial evidence. The court concluded, however, that substantial evidence supports the Board's finding where, from the facts on the record, the Board reasonably concluded that, by filling out and signing the forms, the employees became obligated to pay dues prior to the time that they received a Beck notice. The court agreed with Raymond and the Carpenters that the Board erred in failing to address their contention that, on October 1, by virtue of their Confidential Settlement Agreement, the company and union had a lawful agreement under Section 8(f) of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), 29 U.S.C. 158(f), that could not, without more, be vitiated by unfair labor practices that allegedly occurred on October 2. The court declined to consider the Painters’ principal claim that the Board abused its discretion in declining to require Raymond to provide alternate benefits coverage because the court's decision to remand on the remedy issue may render the claim moot. Finally, the court found no merit in the Painters Union's other claims.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.