Skip to main content

National Labor Relations Board v. Whitesell Corp.

8th CircuitApril 22, 2011No. 10-2934Cited 16 times
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Smith, Arnold, Shepherd
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Failure to AccommodateBreach of Contract

Outcome

The Eighth Circuit enforced the NLRB's order finding that Whitesell Corporation violated the National Labor Relations Act by failing to bargain in good faith, failing to provide timely FMCS notice, refusing to provide requested information, and unilaterally implementing contract terms without reaching valid impasse.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened:** The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) took Whitesell Corporation to court over how the company handled contract negotiations with its workers' union. The NLRB claimed Whitesell broke federal labor law in several ways: they didn't negotiate honestly with the union, failed to properly notify federal mediators about the labor dispute, refused to share important information the union requested during negotiations, and changed contract terms on their own without reaching a true deadlock in talks. **What the Court Decided:** The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the NLRB and ordered Whitesell Corporation to follow the labor board's instructions. The court agreed that the company had violated the National Labor Relations Act through these unfair bargaining practices. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This ruling reinforces important protections for unionized workers during contract negotiations. It confirms that employers must bargain honestly, share relevant information when unions request it, and follow proper procedures before making unilateral changes to working conditions. The decision helps ensure that workers have meaningful participation in negotiations that affect their jobs, wages, and benefits, rather than allowing employers to bypass the collective bargaining process.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Similar Rulings

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. St. Francis Xavier Parochial School and St. Francis Xavier Church
D.C. CircuitJul 1997
Remanded
People in re S.L. and A.L
COLOCTAPPDec 2017

The Rio Blanco County Department of Human Services (Department) became involved with the parents in this case as a result of concerns about the children's welfare due to the condition of the family home, the parents' use of methamphetamine, and criminal cases involving the parents. Attempts at voluntary services failed, and on the Department's petition for dependency and neglect, the district court ultimately terminated the parents' rights. On appeal, the parents contended that the Department failed to make reasonable efforts to reunify them with their children. Specifically, the parents contended that the Department did not give them sufficient time to complete the services under their treatment plans and failed to accommodate their drug testing needs. The termination hearing was not held until more than a year after the motion to terminate was filed. For nine months before the motion to terminate was filed, the Department provided numerous services to the parents, including substance abuse therapy, therapeutic visitation supervision, drug abuse monitoring, and a parental capacity evaluation. The Department also provided counseling for the children. Both parents missed drug tests and tested positive during the testing period, and both were arrested for possession of methamphetamine during the pendency of the case. The Department made reasonable accommodations to meet the parents' needs and the parents had sufficient time to comply with their treatment plans. The record supports the trial court's findings that termination was appropriate because (1) the court-approved appropriate treatment plan had not been complied with by the parents or had not been successful in rehabilitating them (2) the parents were unfit and (3) the conduct or condition of the parents was unlikely to change within a reasonable time. Father also contended that the trial court's decision to interview the 9-year-old twin children together in chambers fundamentally and seriously affected the basi

Defendant Win
Shelley Savage v. Glendale Union High School, District No. 205, Maricopa County
9th CircuitSep 2003
Plaintiff Win
James Chappel v. Laboratory Corporation of America, AKA National Health Lab
9th CircuitNov 2000
Mixed Result
Wright
10th CircuitAug 2001
Defendant Win

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.