§

D & S Leasing, Inc.; Central Transport, Inc. And Central Cartage Co.

299 N.L.R.B. 658 (N.L.R.B. 1990)
D & S Leasing, Inc.; Central Transport, Inc. And Central Cartage Co.

12 Cited authorities

  1. First National Maintenance Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    452 U.S. 666 (1981)   Cited 269 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer has no duty to bargain over a decision to shut down part of its business purely for economic reasons

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Great Dane Trailers, Inc.

    388 U.S. 26 (1967)   Cited 322 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that substantial evidence supported the Board's finding of discriminatory conduct as the Company failed to meet its burden of establishing legitimate motives for its conduct

  3. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Browning-Ferris Industries of Pennsylvania, Inc.

    691 F.2d 1117 (3d Cir. 1982)   Cited 339 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that joint employer situation exists only when "two or more employers exert significant control over the same employees . . . [where] they share or co-determine those matters governing essential terms and conditions of employment"

  5. Esmark, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    887 F.2d 739 (7th Cir. 1989)   Cited 123 times
    Finding "direct participation" theory of liability "limited to situations in which the parent corporation's control over the particular transactions is exercised in disregard of the separate corporate identity of the subsidiary"

  6. W.W. Grainger, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    860 F.2d 244 (7th Cir. 1988)   Cited 30 times
    In W.W. Grainger, Inc. v. NLRB, 860 F.2d 244, 247 (6th Cir. 1988), the court stated that the factual question of whether two employers are joint depends on factors such as "the supervision of the employees' day-to-day activities, authority to hire or fire employees, promulgation of work rules and conditions of employment, work assignments, and issuance of operating instructions."

  7. Royal Typewriter Co. v. N.L.R.B

    533 F.2d 1030 (8th Cir. 1976)   Cited 34 times
    Rejecting the Board's narrow reading of Fibreboard in Ozark Trailers, Inc., 161 NLRB 561, 564-70 that an employer operating two or more plants is obligated to bargain with respect to the closing of one of them

  8. N L Industries, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    536 F.2d 786 (8th Cir. 1976)   Cited 18 times

    No. 75-1714. Submitted March 11, 1976. Decided June 9, 1976. Edward F. Ryan, Carpenter, Bennett Morrissey, Newark, N. J., for petitioner; Irving L. Hurwitz, Newark, N. J., on brief. Anne Libbin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent; John S. Irving, Jr., Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, and Robert A. Giannasi, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before LAY, ROSS and STEPHENSON

  9. Sun-Maid Growers of California v. N.L.R.B

    618 F.2d 56 (9th Cir. 1980)   Cited 7 times
    Discussing when a "joint employer" relationship exists

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Rish Equipment Co.

    407 F.2d 1098 (4th Cir. 1969)   Cited 16 times

    No. 12445. Argued January 10, 1969. Decided March 7, 1969. Leon M. Kestenbaum, Atty., N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, and Paul J. Spielberg, Atty., N.L.R.B., on brief) for petitioner. George V. Gardner, Washington, D.C. (Asa Ambrister on brief) for respondent. Before BOREMAN, WINTER and CRAVEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: The National Labor Relations Board seeks enforcement of its order issued against Rish