Not a government sitenlrb.fyi is an independent project. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the National Labor Relations Board or any government agency. The Board's own site is at nlrb.gov.

Superior Protection, Inc.

20 cases in this site's copy of the record · 0 of those 20 are marked open by the Board · Region 06, 12, 16, 28 · Albuquerque, NM; Houston, TX; Miami, FL; Pittsburgh, PA; Tampa, FL

Each case links to the Board's own docket page. This site holds what the Board listed, not the documents.

What kinds of case

Type	What it is	Here
CA	Charge against an employer	18
RM	Petition filed by an employer	1
UC	Petition to clarify a unit	1

The cases

Petition to clarify a unit
UC
Filed 31 May 2005Case 16-UC-000212ClosedHouston, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 107
INCLUDED: All permanent, full-time and regular part-time security officers assigned to work at GSA contract facilities in Harris, Montgomery and Galveston counties. EXCLUDED: All office clerical employees, employees on temporary assignment, professional employees, managers and supervisors as defined by the Act. (SEE EXHIBIT "A")
Petition filed by an employer
RM
Filed 31 May 2005Case 16-RM-000768ClosedHouston, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 107
INCLUDED: All permanent, full-time and regular part-time security officers assigned to work at GSA contract facilities in Harris, Montgomery and Galveston counties. EXCLUDED: All office clerical employees, employees on temporary assignment, professional employees, managers and supervisors as defined by the Act. (See Exhibit "A")
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 December 2004Case 06-CA-034453ClosedPittsburgh, PARegion 06Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 August 2004Case 12-CA-023994ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 220
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 July 2004Case 12-CA-023975ClosedTampa, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 5 March 2004Case 12-CA-023755ClosedHouston, TXRegion 12Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 3 March 2004Case 12-CA-023742ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 160
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 3 March 2004Case 12-CA-023741ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 160
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 3 March 2004Case 12-CA-023740ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 160
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 3 March 2004Case 12-CA-023739ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 160
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 3 March 2004Case 12-CA-023738ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 160
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 25 February 2004Case 12-CA-023718ClosedHouston, TXRegion 12Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 2 February 2004Case 12-CA-023668ClosedHouston, TXRegion 12Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 December 2003Case 12-CA-023592ClosedHouston, TXRegion 12Workers in the unit 2,200
Superior Protection Inc.
CA
Filed 13 November 2003Case 12-CA-023525ClosedTampa, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 45
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 October 2002Case 12-CA-022567ClosedTampa, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 50
Superior Protection Inc.
CA
Filed 23 October 2001Case 16-CA-021495ClosedHouston, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 50
Superior Protection Inc.
CA
Filed 10 September 2001Case 16-CA-021399ClosedHouston, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 50
Superior Protection, INc.
CA
Filed 23 March 2001Case 28-CA-017077ClosedAlbuquerque, NMRegion 28Workers in the unit 84
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 November 2000Case 28-CA-016858ClosedAlbuquerque, NMRegion 28Workers in the unit 25

Last refreshed 19 September 2026. What is in it, and what is not.

The Labor Board FYI is independent, and is not the Board or any government agency. Where a number here disagrees with the Board's, the Board is right: tell us at [email protected]. If a name here is a private person and not a business or a union, write to the same address and it comes off. Where this comes from.