§

Armco Masonry

07-CA-047293 (N.L.R.B. Mar. 22, 2005)
Armco Masonry

9 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 712 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.

    385 U.S. 432 (1967)   Cited 265 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Approving "discovery-type standard"

  3. Labor Board v. Borg-Warner Corp.

    356 U.S. 342 (1958)   Cited 296 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding employer's insistence on a ballot clause was an unfair labor practice under § 8 because it was a non-mandatory subject of bargaining and it "substantially modifies the collective-bargaining system provided for in the statute by weakening the independence of the 'representative' chosen by the employees. It enables the employer, in effect, to deal with its employees rather than with their statutory representative."

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

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 358 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  5. Pittsburgh Glass Co. v. Board

    313 U.S. 146 (1941)   Cited 294 times
    In Pittsburgh Glass, the Court held that it was not a denial of due process for the Board to refuse to consider evidence relating to the certification issue when petitioner first sought to introduce such evidence at the unfair labor practice hearing.

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

    301 F.3d 83 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 59 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

  7. Livingston Pipe Tube, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    987 F.2d 422 (7th Cir. 1993)   Cited 11 times

    Nos. 91-2939, 91-3152. Argued June 5, 1992. Decided March 2, 1993. Rick Verticchio (argued), Phelps, Kasten, Verticchio Ruyle, Gillespie, IL, for Livingston Pipe Tube Inc. Charles P. Donnelly, Jr., Richard A. Cohen (argued), Marion L. Griffin, Contempt Litigation Branch, Aileen A. Armstrong, Appellate Court, Enforcement Litigation, Washington, DC, Joseph H. Solien, Kathie M. Grampp, N.L.R.B., St. Louis, MO, for N.L.R.B. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before COFFEY and

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Mike O'Connor Chevrolet-Buick-GMC Co.

    512 F.2d 684 (8th Cir. 1975)   Cited 16 times

    No. 74-1645. Submitted February 13, 1975. Decided March 18, 1975. Charles A. Shaw, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Charles Kelso, Atlanta, Ga., for respondents. Appeal from the National Labor Relations Board. Before HEANEY, Circuit Judge, and WANGELIN and NANGLE, District Judges. H. KENNETH WANGELIN and JOHN F. NANGLE, District Judges, Eastern District of Missouri, sitting by designation. HEANEY, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Little Rock Downtowner, Inc.

    341 F.2d 1020 (8th Cir. 1965)   Cited 5 times

    Nos. 17581, 17615. March 5, 1965. Peter M. Giesey, Atty., N.L.R.B. made argument for petitioner and filed brief with Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel and Lee M. Modjeska, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. William E. Fortas and Earl W. DeHart, of Fowler, Fortas DeHart, Newell N. Fowler, Memphis, Tenn., made argument for respondent and filed brief. Before VAN OOSTERHOUT and MEHAFFY, Circuit