Nielsen Lithographing Co. v. National Labor Relations Board
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
854 F.2d 1063 (1988)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Nielsen Lithographing Company (Nielsen) (plaintiff) told its employees’ union that it had to reduce wages to be able to compete with lower-cost competitors. Nielsen predicted that without lowering its costs, the business would fail. The union demanded that Nielsen open its books to validate that claim. Nielsen refused, and the union filed a claim with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) (defendant), claiming that the refusal violated fair-labor-practice standards. The NLRB ruled in the union’s favor and ordered Nielsen to open its books. Right after the NLRB’s decision, the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion in National Labor Relations Board v. Harvstone Manufacturing Corp., a separate but substantially similar case, ruling that disclosure is not required when an employer reduces wages due to a predicted decline in business. Nielsen filed a motion for reconsideration by the NLRB, asserting that the NLRB’s decision in its case was not in accordance with Harvstone. The NLRB denied the motion without directly addressing Harvstone and its reasoning and applicability. Nielsen appealed the order in federal court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Posner, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,400 briefs, keyed to 994 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.
