Royal Development Co., Ltd., Petitioner/cross-Respondent v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent/cross-Petitioner

In this case, we are confronted with apparently conflicting labor law precedents. The legal issues are significant and require our careful analysis. The case stems from the entry of an order by the National Labor Relations Board (the Board) holding Royal Development Company (Royal) in violation of subsections 8(a)(1), 8(a)(3), and 8(a)(4) of the National Labor Relations Act (the Act), 29 U.S.C. § 158 (a)(1), (3), and (4), for its refusal to rehire Schmidt, both because he engaged in union and other protected, concerted activity, and because he filed an unfair labor practice charge against Royal with the Board. The Board ordered Royal to cease and desist from its violations, to post appropriate notices, and to reinstate Schmidt with back pay. Royal filed a petition for review under 29 U.S.C. § 160 (f); the Board cross-applied for enforcement of its order pursuant to 29 U.S.C. § 160 (e). We order enforcement of the Board’s decision on the 8(a)(3) and 8(a)(4) charges, but deny enforcement of its decision on the 8(a)(1) charge.

I

As of early 1978, Royal operated at least six movie theaters, including the King and Queen Theaters. Royal had an agreement with the union, covering its…