Bigg's Foods

16 Cited authorities

Lechmere, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
502 U.S. 527 (1992) Cited 156 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that Board erred in finding that employer should have allowed union on its premises because it had no other way to reach its target audience, inasmuch as in reaching its decision the Board misconstrued prior Supreme Court precedent
Labor Board v. Babcock Wilcox Co.
351 U.S. 105 (1956) Cited 294 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Town & Country Electric, Inc.
516 U.S. 85 (1995) Cited 85 times 10 Legal Analyses
Holding "employee," as defined by the NLRA, "does not exclude paid union organizers"
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
Stanford Hosp. and Clinics v. N.L.R.B
325 F.3d 334 (D.C. Cir. 2003) Cited 15 times
Finding no substantive distinction between solicitation of fellow employees and solicitation of nonemployees
N.L.R.B. v. St. Francis Healthcare Centre
212 F.3d 945 (6th Cir. 2000) Cited 15 times
Observing that an employer’s "own campaign literature distributed after August 6 obviated any threat to reduce or eliminate benefits before bargaining began"
Double Eagle Hotel Casino v. N.L.R.B
414 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2005) Cited 10 times
Sustaining Board invalidation of policy defining "confidential information" to include salary information
Mt. Clemens General Hosp. v. N.L.R.B
328 F.3d 837 (6th Cir. 2003) Cited 12 times 2 Legal Analyses
Noting that there was no evidence that more controversial buttons had caused disturbances
Meijer, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Bd.
130 F.3d 1209 (6th Cir. 1997) Cited 15 times
Holding that under the balancing test in Republic Aviation, 324 U.S. 793, 65 S.Ct. 982, 89 L.Ed. 1372, "employees have a right to wear union insignia" on employerowned uniforms
Cleveland Real Estate Partners v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
95 F.3d 457 (6th Cir. 1996) Cited 16 times
Recognizing that "there is a substantial difference between the rights of employees and of nonemployees with respect to the distribution of union literature on privately owned property"

Bigg's Foods

16 Cited authorities

Holding that Board erred in finding that employer should have allowed union on its premises because it had no other way to reach its target audience, inasmuch as in reaching its decision the Board misconstrued prior Supreme Court precedent

Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot

Holding "employee," as defined by the NLRA, "does not exclude paid union organizers"

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

Finding no substantive distinction between solicitation of fellow employees and solicitation of nonemployees

Observing that an employer’s "own campaign literature distributed after August 6 obviated any threat to reduce or eliminate benefits before bargaining began"

Sustaining Board invalidation of policy defining "confidential information" to include salary information

Noting that there was no evidence that more controversial buttons had caused disturbances

Holding that under the balancing test in Republic Aviation, 324 U.S. 793, 65 S.Ct. 982, 89 L.Ed. 1372, "employees have a right to wear union insignia" on employerowned uniforms

Recognizing that "there is a substantial difference between the rights of employees and of nonemployees with respect to the distribution of union literature on privately owned property"