Capital Medical Center

13 Cited authorities

Hudgens v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
424 U.S. 507 (1976) Cited 545 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding picketers "did not have a First Amendment right to enter [a privately owned] shopping center for the purpose of advertising their strike"
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
Beth Israel Hospital v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
437 U.S. 483 (1978) Cited 221 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in the context of solicitation rules, such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time
Eastex, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
437 U.S. 556 (1978) Cited 196 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that a newsletter that "urg[ed] employees to write their legislators to oppose incorporation of the state 'right-to-work' statute into a revised state constitution," "criticiz[ed] a Presidential veto of an increase in the federal minimum wage and urg[ed] employees to register to vote" was protected concerted activity
Republic Aviation Corp. v. Board
324 U.S. 793 (1945) Cited 495 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."
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. Baptist Hospital, Inc.
442 U.S. 773 (1979) Cited 71 times 2 Legal Analyses
Upholding solicitation ban in corridors and sitting rooms
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. Southern Maryland Hosp. Center
916 F.2d 932 (4th Cir. 1990) Cited 17 times
Noting that “the Board has on several occasions found that employers unreasonably chilled the exercise of their employees' Section 7 rights through excessive surveillance”
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ayer Lar Sanitarium
436 F.2d 45 (9th Cir. 1970) Cited 39 times
In NLRB v. Ayer Lar Sanitarium, supra, 436 F.2d at 50, we said that the "test is whether the business reason or the... union activity is the moving cause behind the discharge.

Capital Medical Center

13 Cited authorities

Holding picketers "did not have a First Amendment right to enter [a privately owned] shopping center for the purpose of advertising their strike"

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, in the context of solicitation rules, such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time

Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."

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

Upholding solicitation ban in corridors and sitting rooms

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

Noting that “the Board has on several occasions found that employers unreasonably chilled the exercise of their employees' Section 7 rights through excessive surveillance”

In NLRB v. Ayer Lar Sanitarium, supra, 436 F.2d at 50, we said that the "test is whether the business reason or the... union activity is the moving cause behind the discharge.