American Sales and Management Organization, LLC d/b/a Eulen America

21 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.
462 U.S. 393 (1983) Cited 651 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."
National Labor Rel. B. v. Kentucky R. Comm. C
532 U.S. 706 (2001) Cited 180 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that the burden of proving a statutory exception generally falls on the party who claims a benefit
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
Grandison v. U.S.
495 U.S. 934 (1990) Cited 53 times
No. 89-6673. May 14, 1990. C.A. 4TH Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 885 F.2d 143.
Abm Onsite Servs. W., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
849 F.3d 1137 (D.C. Cir. 2017) Cited 10 times
Vacating order when the Board improperly applied the applicable standard over the course of four years
Allied Aviation Serv. Co. of N.J. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
854 F.3d 55 (D.C. Cir. 2017) Cited 6 times
Referring to § 160(e)'s "preservation requirement"
Davis Supermarkets, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
2 F.3d 1162 (D.C. Cir. 1993) Cited 30 times 1 Legal Analyses
Affirming bargaining order where company's "large number of unfair labor practices, . . . committed by some of the top officials in the company, and . . . directed at numerous employees . . . instilled a strong fear of union representation in the employees."
Asarco, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
86 F.3d 1401 (5th Cir. 1996) Cited 22 times
Finding of antiunion animus necessary to finding of section 8 violation
Nursing v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
164 F.3d 867 (4th Cir. 1999) Cited 14 times
Holding that an employer could only distribute its proposal to union employees when the proposal was "properly before" the union
Palace Sports Entm't, Inc. v. NLRB
411 F.3d 212 (D.C. Cir. 2005) Cited 6 times
No. 04-1261, 04-1276. Argued March 18, 2005. Decided May 31, 2005. On Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Robert M. Vercruysse argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Gary S. Fealk. David A. Fleischer, Senior Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Arthur F. Rosenfeld, General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Assistant General Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong
Section 151 - Definitions; short title
45 U.S.C. § 151 Cited 2,957 times 7 Legal Analyses
Defining "minor dispute" as disputes "growing out of grievances or out of the interpretation or application of agreements covering rates of pay, rules, or working conditions."

American Sales and Management Organization, LLC d/b/a Eulen America

21 Cited authorities

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."

Holding that the burden of proving a statutory exception generally falls on the party who claims a benefit

Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

Vacating order when the Board improperly applied the applicable standard over the course of four years

Referring to § 160(e)'s "preservation requirement"

Affirming bargaining order where company's "large number of unfair labor practices, . . . committed by some of the top officials in the company, and . . . directed at numerous employees . . . instilled a strong fear of union representation in the employees."

Finding of antiunion animus necessary to finding of section 8 violation

Holding that an employer could only distribute its proposal to union employees when the proposal was "properly before" the union

Defining "minor dispute" as disputes "growing out of grievances or out of the interpretation or application of agreements covering rates of pay, rules, or working conditions."