Blockbuster Pavilion

24 Cited authorities

Edison Co. v. Labor Board
305 U.S. 197 (1938) Cited 19,302 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that a Board order cannot be grounded in hearsay
Consolo v. Federal Maritime Comm'n
383 U.S. 607 (1966) Cited 3,613 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that even if two inconsistent conclusions may be drawn from the evidence, the agency's interpretation may be supported by substantial evidence
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.
395 U.S. 575 (1969) Cited 1,035 times 67 Legal Analyses
Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"
Sure-Tan, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
467 U.S. 883 (1984) Cited 416 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that NLRB could order reinstatement with back pay as a remedy for constructive discharge
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
Ford Motor Co. (Chicago Stamping Plant) v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
441 U.S. 488 (1979) Cited 288 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that proposal concerning in-plant cafeteria prices was within duty to bargain despite fact that prices were set by third-party supplier rather than employer
Labor Board v. Mackay Co.
304 U.S. 333 (1938) Cited 535 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Natural Gas Utility District
402 U.S. 600 (1971) Cited 187 times 32 Legal Analyses
Holding utility district was political subdivision under that standard
Locomotive Engineers v. Atchison, T. S. F. R. Co.
516 U.S. 152 (1996) Cited 36 times
Holding text and structure of statute clear
Topeka Santa Fe Ry. Co. v. Pena
44 F.3d 437 (7th Cir. 1994) Cited 55 times
Concluding that interpretive rules are "undeserving of deference under Chevron"
Section 160 - Prevention of unfair labor practices
29 U.S.C. § 160 Cited 7,061 times 23 Legal Analyses
Finding that the procedures for unfair labor practice cases mandated by R.C. 4117.12 and 4117.13 are substantively identical to those established in NLRA to govern unfair labor practice cases before NLRB

Blockbuster Pavilion

24 Cited authorities

Holding that a Board order cannot be grounded in hearsay

Holding that even if two inconsistent conclusions may be drawn from the evidence, the agency's interpretation may be supported by substantial evidence

Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

Holding that NLRB could order reinstatement with back pay as a remedy for constructive discharge

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

Holding that proposal concerning in-plant cafeteria prices was within duty to bargain despite fact that prices were set by third-party supplier rather than employer

Holding that an employer may replace striking workers with others to carry on business so long as the employer is not guilty of unfair labor practices

Holding utility district was political subdivision under that standard

Holding text and structure of statute clear

Concluding that interpretive rules are "undeserving of deference under Chevron"

Finding that the procedures for unfair labor practice cases mandated by R.C. 4117.12 and 4117.13 are substantively identical to those established in NLRA to govern unfair labor practice cases before NLRB