§

Crittenton Hospital

342 N.L.R.B. 686 (N.L.R.B. 2004)
Crittenton Hospital

9 Cited authorities

  1. Metropolitan Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    460 U.S. 693 (1983)   Cited 311 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union may, under certain circumstances, waive members' NLRA rights

  2. Detroit Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    440 U.S. 301 (1979)   Cited 227 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that NLRB erred in requiring employer to disclose performance test scores of employees as information for collective bargaining, regardless of employee consent, because of the sensitive nature of the test scores

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.

    385 U.S. 432 (1967)   Cited 265 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Approving "discovery-type standard"

  4. Labor Board v. Borg-Warner Corp.

    356 U.S. 342 (1958)   Cited 296 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding employer's insistence on a ballot clause was an unfair labor practice under § 8 because it was a non-mandatory subject of bargaining and it "substantially modifies the collective-bargaining system provided for in the statute by weakening the independence of the 'representative' chosen by the employees. It enables the employer, in effect, to deal with its employees rather than with their statutory representative."

  5. DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    288 F.3d 434 (D.C. Cir. 2002)   Cited 12 times
    Noting that relevant information requests are presumed to have been made in good faith "until the company demonstrates otherwise"

  6. N.L.R.B. v. American National Can Co.

    924 F.2d 518 (4th Cir. 1991)   Cited 8 times
    Upholding a refusal to defer requests for information and recognizing that "the Board has traditionally refused to defer in right-to-information cases"

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Pepsi-Cola Distributing Co. of Tennessee, Inc.

    646 F.2d 1173 (6th Cir. 1981)   Cited 7 times

    No. 79-1314. Argued February 2, 1981. Decided May 1, 1981. Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, John Ferguson, Joseph Norelli, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Curtis L. Mack, Director, Region 10, N.L.R.B., Atlanta, Ga., for petitioner. J. W. Alexander, Jr., Blakeney, Alexander Machen, Charlotte, N.C., for respondent. Petition from the National Labor Relations Board. Before EDWARDS, Chief Judge, BROWN, Circuit Judge, and BATTISTI, District Judge. Honorable Frank J. Battisti, Chief Judge, United

  8. Section 333.21515 - Confidentiality of records, data, and knowledge

    Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.21515   Cited 46 times   1 Legal Analyses

    The records, data, and knowledge collected for or by individuals or committees assigned a review function described in this article are confidential and shall be used only for the purposes provided in this article, shall not be public records, and shall not be available for court subpoena. MCL 333.21515 1978, Act 368, Eff. 9/30/1978 .

  9. Section 333.20175 - Maintaining record for each patient; confidentiality; wrongfully altering or destroying records; noncompliance; fine; licensing and certification records as public records; confidentiality; disclosure; report or notice of disciplinary action; information provided in report; nature and use of certain records, data, and knowledge

    Mich. Comp. Laws § 333.20175   Cited 39 times   1 Legal Analyses

    (1) A health facility or agency shall keep and maintain a record for each patient, including a full and complete record of tests and examinations performed, observations made, treatments provided, and in the case of a hospital, the purpose of hospitalization. If a medical service provided to a patient on or after the effective date of the amendatory act that added this sentence involves the vaginal or anal penetration of the patient, a health facility or agency shall ensure that the patient's medical