Associated Constructors

16 Cited authorities

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."
Fibreboard Corp. v. Labor Board
379 U.S. 203 (1964) Cited 731 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA
First National Maintenance Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
452 U.S. 666 (1981) Cited 269 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer has no duty to bargain over a decision to shut down part of its business purely for economic reasons
Radio Union v. Broadcast Serv
380 U.S. 255 (1965) Cited 326 times
Holding that two entities were a single employer and therefore that their gross receipts could be totaled together to establish jurisdiction under the National Labor Relations Act
South Prairie Constr. v. Operating Engineers
425 U.S. 800 (1976) Cited 222 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that appeals court usurped role of NLRB by reversing Board's legal conclusion and proceeding to decide issue of fact that should be decided by Board in the first instance
Int'l Logistics Gr., Ltd. v. Chrysler Corp.
494 U.S. 1066 (1990) Cited 128 times
Holding that Superior Court decisions "`are indicia of how the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would decide' the issue" (quoting McGowan v. University of Scranton, 759 F.2d 287, 291 (3rd Cir. 1985))
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
Textile Workers v. Darlington Co.
380 U.S. 263 (1965) Cited 168 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer has the absolute right, at least as far as the NLRA is concerned, to terminate his entire business for any reason
N.L.R.B. v. Don Burgess Const. Corp.
596 F.2d 378 (9th Cir. 1979) Cited 101 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that section 10(b) limitations period begins to run when the employee "discovers, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the acts constituting the alleged [violation]"
Int. U. of Operating Eng. v. N.L.R.B
518 F.2d 1040 (D.C. Cir. 1975) Cited 50 times
Finding the common management prong satisfied by several interchanges of higher-level managers and officers between the corporations

Associated Constructors

16 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 "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA

Holding that an employer has no duty to bargain over a decision to shut down part of its business purely for economic reasons

Holding that two entities were a single employer and therefore that their gross receipts could be totaled together to establish jurisdiction under the National Labor Relations Act

Holding that appeals court usurped role of NLRB by reversing Board's legal conclusion and proceeding to decide issue of fact that should be decided by Board in the first instance

Holding that Superior Court decisions "`are indicia of how the Pennsylvania Supreme Court would decide' the issue" (quoting McGowan v. University of Scranton, 759 F.2d 287, 291 (3rd Cir. 1985))

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

Holding that an employer has the absolute right, at least as far as the NLRA is concerned, to terminate his entire business for any reason

Holding that section 10(b) limitations period begins to run when the employee "discovers, or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered, the acts constituting the alleged [violation]"

Finding the common management prong satisfied by several interchanges of higher-level managers and officers between the corporations