Magic Chef, Inc., Petitioner, v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent, 443 F.2d 374 (6th Cir. 1971)

Annotate this Case
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit - 443 F.2d 374 (6th Cir. 1971) June 28, 1971

Petition to Review a Decision and Order of the National Labor Relations Board.

John R. Crenshaw, Atlanta, Ga., Alston, Miller & Gaines, Atlanta, Ga., on the brief, for petitioner.

Abigail Cooley Baskir, N.L.R.B., Washington, D. C., Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, Harold B. Zanoff, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D. C., on the brief, for respondent.

Before EDWARDS, McCREE and KENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.


These cases involve two petitions for review and cross-applications for enforcement of orders of the National Labor Relations Board. They have been consolidated for hearing and decision.

The orders required the company to rehire and grant back pay to three employees whom the Board found to be discharged because of union activities, in violation of § 8(a) (1) and (3) of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(a) (1) and (3) (1964).

The discharges were justified by company officials on the ground that each of the men had violated a general no solicitation rule by soliciting union memberships.

From the evidence given before the Hearing Examiner and from the fact that each man had a prior good work record before the discharge, the Board inferred that the discharges were pretextual.

On review of the evidentiary record, we find substantial support for the findings of the Board.

Additionally, in Case No. 20,454, petitioner contends that the union had not filed timely exceptions to the Trial Examiner's decision. On review of the record, we find no merit to this contention.

The orders of the National Labor Relations Board will be enforced.

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.