§

Allied Mechanical Services, Inc.

07-CA-040907 (N.L.R.B. May. 28, 2004)
Allied Mechanical Services, Inc.

23 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 652 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."

  2. Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor Board

    313 U.S. 177 (1941)   Cited 871 times
    Holding that the NLRA limits the Board's backpay authority to restoring “actual losses”

  3. Machinists Local v. Labor Board

    362 U.S. 411 (1960)   Cited 276 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “a finding of violation which is inescapably grounded on events predating the limitations period” is untimely

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Town & Country Electric, Inc.

    516 U.S. 85 (1995)   Cited 85 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding "employee," as defined by the NLRA, "does not exclude paid union organizers"

  5. Labor Bd. v. Washington Aluminum Co.

    370 U.S. 9 (1962)   Cited 206 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Financial Institution Employees, Local 1182

    475 U.S. 192 (1986)   Cited 76 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that labor law prohibits the assignment or transfer of a collective bargaining agreement against the wishes of the workers for whom the agreement provides representation

  8. International Ass'n of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Local 3 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    843 F.2d 770 (3d Cir. 1988)   Cited 119 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding review of the Board's decision to apply a new rule of law retrospectively is deferential and that the Board's ruling will be disturbed only if it wreaks manifest injustice

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. FES

    301 F.3d 83 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 49 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding issue not exhausted where the "tenor" of petitioner's objection to the Board was "purely factual," but the tenor of the objection on appeal was legal

  10. National Labor Rel. v. Taylor Mach. Prods

    136 F.3d 507 (6th Cir. 1998)   Cited 16 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 96-6047 Argued: December 11, 1997 Decided and Filed: February 18, 1998 Pursuant to Sixth Circuit Rule 24 ARGUED: Anthony A. Asher, SULLIVAN, WARD, BONE, TYLER ASHER, Southfield, Michigan, for Respondent. David Habenstreit, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. ON BRIEF: Ronald S. Lederman, Scott D. Norton, SULLIVAN, WARD, BONE, TYLER ASHER, Southfield, Michigan, for Respondent. David Habenstreit, NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, OFFICE