Opinions of the United 1997 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

2-6-1997

Hertz Corp. v. NLRB Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 95-3621

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1997

Recommended Citation "Hertz Corp. v. NLRB" (1997). 1997 Decisions. Paper 30. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1997/30

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1997 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

Nos. 95-3621 & 96-3000

HERTZ CORPORATION,

Petitioner v.

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD,

Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board , United States Department of Labor (NLRB No. 5-CA-23956)

Argued June 11, 1996

Before: SCIRICA and ROTH, Circuit Judges and RESTANI1, Judge, U.S. Court of International Trade

(Opinion Filed January 28, 1997)

ORDER AMENDING SLIP OPINION

1 Honorable Jane A. Restani, United States Judge for the United States Court of International Trade, sitting by designation. It is hereby ordered that the slip opinion in the above-entitled matter on January 28, 1997 is hereby amended in accordance with the following:

The caption is amended to include appeal No. 96-3000 and the first complete paragraph on page 13 of the slip opinion shall read:

Information pertaining to individuals who are not members of a union bargaining unit is not available to a union on demand. A union must communicate facts that reasonably support its suspicion of discrimination in hiring. Because Local 922 failed to do so in this case, we will grant Hertz’s petition for review, reverse the NLRB panel decision, and remand the case to the NLRB to dismiss the Union's complaint. We will also deny the Board's cross-application for enforcement.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Jane R. Roth

Circuit Judge

DATED: February 6, 1997