§

Catalina Pacific Concrete Co.

330 N.L.R.B. 144 (N.L.R.B. 1999)
Catalina Pacific Concrete Co.

10 Cited authorities

  1. Litton Financial Printing Division v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    501 U.S. 190 (1991)   Cited 795 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that where a court must determine the validity of an arbitration agreement, it "cannot avoid that duty" just because the court must decide an issue on the merits

  2. Allentown Mack Sales & Service, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    522 U.S. 359 (1998)   Cited 426 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Board "is not free to prescribe what inferences from the evidence it will accept and reject, but must draw all those inferences that the evidence fairly demands"

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Joy Recovery Tech

    134 F.3d 1307 (7th Cir. 1998)   Cited 28 times
    Concluding that "[i]n this case, timing is everything," where "[t]he closing of the department comes on the heels of the union's organizational activity," including filing a petition for a representation election

  4. Lee Lumber & Building Material Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    117 F.3d 1454 (D.C. Cir. 1997)   Cited 27 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Noting that, "[b]ecause affirmative bargaining orders interfere with the employee free choice that is a core principle of the Act," we "view them with suspicion" and demand special justification for them

  5. Taylor Warehouse v. National Labor Relations

    98 F.3d 892 (6th Cir. 1996)   Cited 26 times
    Holding that "credibility determinations made by . . . administrative law judge and adopted by the [National Labor Relations Board] (NLRB) are entitled to great weight"

  6. Pirelli Cable Corp. v. National Labor rel

    141 F.3d 503 (4th Cir. 1998)   Cited 20 times
    Holding that an employer may overcome an unfair labor practice charge if it can show that the employee would have been discharged in the absence of union activity

  7. Underwriters Laboratories Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    147 F.3d 1048 (9th Cir. 1998)   Cited 9 times

    Nos. 97-70646, 97-70841 Argued and Submitted April 13, 1998 — San Francisco, California. Filed June 22, 1998 Petition for Review and Cross Application for Enforcement of a Decision of the National Labor Relations Board. NLRB No. 32-CA-13189 COUNSEL Allen J. Gross, Mitchell, Silberberg Knupp, Los Angeles, California, for the petitioner-cross-respondent. James S. Scott A. Donald Rhoads, National Labor Relations Board, Oakland, California; Aileen A. Armstrong, Office of the General Counsel, National

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Powell Elec. Mfg. Co.

    906 F.2d 1007 (5th Cir. 1990)   Cited 15 times
    Finding no impasse where “little substantive bargaining had taken place” during the parties' few negotiation sessions and the union had made proposals that “obviously were grist for the collective bargaining mill”

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Hi-Tech Cable Corp.

    128 F.3d 271 (5th Cir. 1997)   Cited 6 times
    Holding that the temporal proximity between the unfair labor practices and the withdrawal of recognition allows for a conclusion that employees' display of disaffection for their union might have been induced by the company's unlawful actions

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Walker Const. Co.

    928 F.2d 695 (5th Cir. 1991)   Cited 4 times

    No. 90-4264. April 15, 1991. Howard E. Perlstein, Paul Hitterman, Aileen Armstrong, Deputy Assoc. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Larry W. Wilshire, Richard W. Wiseman, Brown, Herman, Scott, Dean Miles, Ft. Worth, Tex., for respondent. James Walker, Ft. Worth, Tex., for Walker Const. Co. Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Before CLARK, Chief Judge, RONEY, and DUHE, Circuit Judges. Circuit Judge of the Eleventh Circuit, sitting