Colorado Fire Sprinkler Inc.

11 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Canning

    573 U.S. 513 (2014)   Cited 274 times   150 Legal Analyses
    Holding that because there was no quorum of validly appointed board members, the NLRB “lacked authority to act,” and the enforcement order was therefore “void ab initio ”
  2. 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"
  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Burns International Security Services, Inc.

    406 U.S. 272 (1972)   Cited 478 times   49 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a successor is not bound to substantive terms of previous collective bargaining agreement
  4. Garment Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 731 (1961)   Cited 213 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support
  5. Labor Bd. v. Greyhound Lines

    303 U.S. 261 (1938)   Cited 264 times
    In National Labor Relations Board v. Pennsylvania Greyhound Lines, Inc., 303 U.S. 261, 58 S.Ct. 571, 572, 82 L.Ed. 831, 115 A.L.R. 307, three related corporations were involved. The two respondents claimed that the third corporation was the `employer'.
  6. International Ass'n of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Local 3 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    843 F.2d 770 (3d Cir. 1988)   Cited 119 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding review of the Board's decision to apply a new rule of law retrospectively is deferential and that the Board's ruling will be disturbed only if it wreaks manifest injustice
  7. Allied Mech. Servs., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    668 F.3d 758 (D.C. Cir. 2012)   Cited 20 times

    Nos. 10–1328 10–1385. 2012-02-17 ALLIED MECHANICAL SERVICES, INC., Petitioner v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent.United Association of Journeymen and Apprentices of the Plumbing and Pipefitting Industry of the United States and Canada, AFL–CIO, Union Local 357, Intervenor. On Petition for Review and Cross–Application for Enforcement of Orders of the National Labor Relations Board.David M. Buday argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Keith E. Eastland. Steven B. Goldstein

  8. Nova Plumbing, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    330 F.3d 531 (D.C. Cir. 2003)   Cited 26 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that contractual language alone cannot establish a § 9 relationship where the union actually lacks majority support
  9. Peerless Roofing Co., Ltd. v. N.L.R.B

    641 F.2d 734 (9th Cir. 1981)   Cited 42 times
    Holding that the requirements of § 302(c) were satisfied when contributions were made pursuant to expired collective bargaining agreements
  10. Leach Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    54 F.3d 802 (D.C. Cir. 1995)   Cited 4 times

    No. 93-1707. Argued March 24, 1995. Decided May 12, 1995. On Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. William H. Emer, Los Angeles, CA, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Kelly F. Watson, Los Angeles, CA. Robert J. Englehart, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, DC, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Linda R. Sher, Acting Associate General Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputy Associate General