§

Armco, Inc., Ashland Works

298 N.L.R.B. 416 (N.L.R.B. 1990)
Armco, Inc., Ashland Works

6 Cited authorities

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

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 657 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 873 times
    Holding that the NLRA limits the Board's backpay authority to restoring “actual losses”

  3. Kallmann v. N.L.R.B

    640 F.2d 1094 (9th Cir. 1981)   Cited 64 times
    Holding that an employer could not be compelled to pay a greater amount of back-pay than the amount the employer would have paid its employees in the absence of the unfair labor practice

  4. Armco, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    832 F.2d 357 (6th Cir. 1987)   Cited 18 times
    In Armco, the Sixth Circuit held that the § 10(b) period did not commence when the employer communicated its intent to recognize another union, but only when the other union actually signed an agreement with the employer, thereby consummating the labor practices violation.

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Dent

    534 F.2d 844 (9th Cir. 1976)   Cited 21 times

    No. 74-2474. March 19, 1976. Thomas A. Woodley (argued), N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. J. Mark Montobbio (argued), Severson, Werson, Berke Melchior, San Francisco, Cal., for respondent. Before KOELSCH and ELY, Circuit Judges and TURRENTINE, District Judge. Honorable Howard B. Turrentine, United States District Judge, Southern District of California, sitting by designation. OPINION TURRENTINE, District Judge: Up until June 1, 1972, Chico Convalescent Hospital (hereinafter referred to

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ogle Protection Service, Inc.

    444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971)   Cited 3 times   3 Legal Analyses

    No. 21049. June 30, 1971. Stanley R. Zirkin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Stanley R. Zirkin, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Douglas C. Dahn, Detroit, Mich., for respondents; Tolleson, Burgess Mead, Robert D. Welchli, Detroit, Mich., on brief. Before CELEBREZZE, PECK and McCREE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This case is before us a second