Construction Products

15 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.
462 U.S. 393 (1983) Cited 652 times 11 Legal Analyses
Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."
Phelps Dodge Corp. v. Labor Board
313 U.S. 177 (1941) Cited 871 times
Holding that the NLRA limits the Board's backpay authority to restoring “actual losses”
Radio Officers v. Labor Board
347 U.S. 17 (1954) Cited 470 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[t]he policy of the Act is to insulate employees' jobs from their organizational rights"
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"
Romano v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith
487 U.S. 1205 (1988) Cited 105 times 6 Legal Analyses
Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption
Labor Bd. v. Washington Aluminum Co.
370 U.S. 9 (1962) Cited 206 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections
Prill v. N.L.R.B
755 F.2d 941 (D.C. Cir. 1985) Cited 80 times 3 Legal Analyses
In Prill v. NLRB, 755 F.2d 941, 948 (D.C. Cir. 1985), the D.C. Circuit remanded a case to the agency because "a regulation [was] based on an incorrect view of applicable law."
Fluor Daniel, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
332 F.3d 961 (6th Cir. 2003) Cited 15 times
In Fluor Daniel, the Board apparently calculated the number of deviations from the hiring policy at issue by counting the number of deviations from all hiring protocols for each applicant.
Laro Maintenance Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
56 F.3d 224 (D.C. Cir. 1995) Cited 23 times
Inferring discriminatory motive from, inter alia, an employer's professed desire to hire the best qualified workers and the employer's subsequent decision to hire employees with no relevant experience over union members with experience
Prill v. N.L.R.B
835 F.2d 1481 (D.C. Cir. 1987) Cited 27 times 8 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that an employee takes concerted action “when he acts with the actual participation or on the authority of his co-workers”

Construction Products

15 Cited authorities

Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."

Holding that the NLRA limits the Board's backpay authority to restoring “actual losses”

Holding that "[t]he policy of the Act is to insulate employees' jobs from their organizational rights"

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

Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption

Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections

In Prill v. NLRB, 755 F.2d 941, 948 (D.C. Cir. 1985), the D.C. Circuit remanded a case to the agency because "a regulation [was] based on an incorrect view of applicable law."

In Fluor Daniel, the Board apparently calculated the number of deviations from the hiring policy at issue by counting the number of deviations from all hiring protocols for each applicant.

Inferring discriminatory motive from, inter alia, an employer's professed desire to hire the best qualified workers and the employer's subsequent decision to hire employees with no relevant experience over union members with experience

Recognizing that an employee takes concerted action “when he acts with the actual participation or on the authority of his co-workers”