David Saxe Productions, LLC & V Theater Group, LLC, Joint Employers

49 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.
462 U.S. 393 (1983) Cited 656 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."
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.
395 U.S. 575 (1969) Cited 1,036 times 71 Legal Analyses
Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Curtin Matheson Scientific, Inc.
494 U.S. 775 (1990) Cited 177 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that Board has "considerable deference" in determining the legal rule to apply and should be upheld "as long as it is rational and consistent with the Act"
Beth Israel Hospital v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
437 U.S. 483 (1978) Cited 221 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in the context of solicitation rules, such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time
Republic Aviation Corp. v. Board
324 U.S. 793 (1945) Cited 495 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."
Labor Board v. Parts Co.
375 U.S. 405 (1964) Cited 213 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”
Romano v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith
487 U.S. 1205 (1988) Cited 106 times 6 Legal Analyses
Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption
N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.
662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981) Cited 358 times 46 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
Central Hardware Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
407 U.S. 539 (1972) Cited 142 times 3 Legal Analyses
Finding that retail store parking lot was not "open to the public" and that the retail store could exclude nonemployee union members from parking lot
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Savair Manufacturing Co.
414 U.S. 270 (1973) Cited 123 times 1 Legal Analyses
Noting that although an employee may not be "legally bound to vote for the union and has not promised to do so in any formal sense" some "would feel obliged " to cast a union vote after having signed a union recognition slip
Section 158 - Unfair labor practices
29 U.S.C. § 158 Cited 10,333 times 86 Legal Analyses
Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355
Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy
29 U.S.C. § 151 Cited 5,099 times 34 Legal Analyses
Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"
Rule 615 - Excluding Witnesses from the Courtroom; Preventing an Excluded Witness's Access to Trial Testimony
Fed. R. Evid. 615 Cited 1,412 times 7 Legal Analyses
Finding that a motion to exclude a witness from the courtroom is generally grantable as of right and on the court's own motion

David Saxe Productions, LLC & V Theater Group, LLC, Joint Employers

49 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 a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

Holding that Board has "considerable deference" in determining the legal rule to apply and should be upheld "as long as it is rational and consistent with the Act"

Holding that, in the context of solicitation rules, such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time

Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."

Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”

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

Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

Finding that retail store parking lot was not "open to the public" and that the retail store could exclude nonemployee union members from parking lot

Noting that although an employee may not be "legally bound to vote for the union and has not promised to do so in any formal sense" some "would feel obliged " to cast a union vote after having signed a union recognition slip

Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355

Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"

Finding that a motion to exclude a witness from the courtroom is generally grantable as of right and on the court's own motion