§

Beverly Health & Rehabilitation Services

346 N.L.R.B. 1319 (N.L.R.B. 2006)
Beverly Health & Rehabilitation Services

22 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 710 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. 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

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Baptist Hospital, Inc.

    442 U.S. 773 (1979)   Cited 71 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Upholding solicitation ban in corridors and sitting rooms

  5. Labor Board v. Electrical Workers

    346 U.S. 464 (1953)   Cited 125 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Upholding discharge where employees publicly disparaged quality of employer's product, with no discernible relationship to pending labor dispute

  6. Luden's Inc. v. Local Union No. 6

    28 F.3d 347 (3d Cir. 1994)   Cited 83 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an implied-in-fact CBA will not continue to exist after the CBA terminates if there was a "clear, particularized intent to disavow [the CBA's] terms."

  7. Torrington Extend-A-Care Emp. Ass'n v. N.L.R.B

    17 F.3d 580 (2d Cir. 1994)   Cited 30 times
    Holding that Board could rely on circumstantial evidence to establish one person's knowledge of another's union activities

  8. Beverly Health Rehab. Serv. v. N.L.R.B

    317 F.3d 316 (D.C. Cir. 2003)   Cited 18 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding no unfairness where the plaintiff “had every incentive to—and did—litigate the issue before the [previous court]”

  9. Beverly California Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    227 F.3d 817 (7th Cir. 2000)   Cited 20 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer may not probe directly or indirectly into an employee's reasons for supporting a union

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Thor Power Tool Co.

    351 F.2d 584 (7th Cir. 1965)   Cited 68 times
    Concluding that "when the entire record is considered there was substantial evidence to support the Board's finding that [employee's] discharge was the result of his having presented a grievance to the management" even though employee was overheard referring to company's superintendent as "the horse's ass" and was thereafter summarily discharged