Jacobs Manufacturing Co.
National Labor Relations Board
94 N.L.R.B. 1214 (1951)
- Written by Rose VanHofwegen, JD
Facts
Jacobs Manufacturing Company (defendant) shared the costs of a group insurance plan for employees but did not have a pension plan. When negotiating a new collective-bargaining agreement (CBA), the union (plaintiff) requested that Jacobs pay all the insurance-plan costs, but Jacobs rejected that proposal. The parties entered a two-year CBA that did not mention insurance or pension plans, with a clause that allowed the parties to reopen discussions about wage rates after one year. When the union demanded wage increases a year later, it again requested that Jacobs pay all insurance-plan costs and establish a pension plan. Jacobs refused to discuss the plan requests, arguing the reopening clause did not cover them. The union filed unfair-labor-practice charges claiming Jacobs failed to bargain in good faith. The trial examiner found Jacobs had to bargain about the pension plan, but not the insurance plan.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning ()
Concurrence (Herzog, chairman)
Concurrence/Dissent (Reynolds, member)
Dissent (Murdock, member)
What to do next…
Here's why 779,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.