E Center

10 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 712 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"
  2. Metropolitan Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    460 U.S. 693 (1983)   Cited 314 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union may, under certain circumstances, waive members' NLRA rights
  3. 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"
  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.

    385 U.S. 432 (1967)   Cited 265 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Approving "discovery-type standard"
  5. Labor Board v. Truitt Mfg. Co.

    351 U.S. 149 (1956)   Cited 223 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the duty to produce information relevant to a bargaining issue is derivative from the broader statutory duty to bargain in good-faith
  6. Soule Glass and Glazing Co. v. N.L.R.B

    652 F.2d 1055 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 97 times
    Holding that the employer "must bargain with respect to the decision to remove work from bargaining unit employees, not merely its effects on the employees"
  7. Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers Local Union No. 6-418 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    711 F.2d 348 (D.C. Cir. 1983)   Cited 41 times

    Nos. 82-1418 to 82-1420, 82-1743, 82-1589 and 82-1940. Argued May 5, 1983. Decided June 30, 1983. George H. Cohen, with whom Laurence Gold, Washington, D.C., was on brief, for petitioners, Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers, Local Union No. 6-418, AFL-CIO, et al. George J. Tichy, II, San Francisco, Cal., with whom Robert K. Carrol, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner, Borden Chemical, A Division of Borden, Inc. Howard A. Crawford, with whom Jack D. Rowe, Kansas City, Mo., was on brief, for petitioner

  8. United States Testing Co. v. N.L.R.B

    160 F.3d 14 (D.C. Cir. 1998)   Cited 18 times
    Rejecting employer's contention that it had insufficient notice regarding the potential relevance of a union request for individual insurance claims information because "context is everything," and the employer "put on the table" the concern of growing health care costs
  9. West Penn Power Co. v. N.L.R.B

    394 F.3d 233 (4th Cir. 2005)   Cited 4 times

    Nos. 03-1984, 03-2139. Argued: June 3, 2004. Decided: January 12, 2005. Petition for review of National Labor Relations Board. ARGUED: John Clark Unkovic, Reed Smith, L.L.P., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for West Penn Power Company, Potomac Edison Power Company, and Allegheny Energy Service Corporation. Joan Elizabeth Hoyte, Office of the General, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for the Board. Burton E. Rosenthal, Segal, Roitman Coleman, Boston, Massachusetts, for Intervenor. ON BRIEF:

  10. Safeway Stores, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    691 F.2d 953 (10th Cir. 1982)   Cited 13 times

    No. 80-2175. October 27, 1982. T. H. Eskridge of Boesche, McDermott Eskridge, Tulsa, Okl., for petitioner. Victoria A. Higman, Washington, D.C. (William A. Lubbers, Gen. Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel, Robert E. Allen, Acting Associate Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel and Collis Suzanne Stocking, Atty., N. L. R. B., Washington, D.C., with her on the brief), for respondent and cross-petitioner. Before HOLLOWAY, McWILLIAMS and BARRETT, Circuit Judges. BARRETT