§
Earle Industries

11 Cited authorities

  1. 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."

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. Weingarten, Inc.

    420 U.S. 251 (1975)   Cited 434 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer commits an unfair labor practice by compelling an employee to attend an investigatory meeting that could lead to discipline without allowing the employee to bring a union witness

  3. Lechmere, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    502 U.S. 527 (1992)   Cited 156 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Board erred in finding that employer should have allowed union on its premises because it had no other way to reach its target audience, inasmuch as in reaching its decision the Board misconstrued prior Supreme Court precedent

  4. 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."

  5. 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

  6. Crown Central Petroleum Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    430 F.2d 724 (5th Cir. 1970)   Cited 40 times
    In Crown Central Petroleum Corp. v. NLRB, 430 F.2d 724 (5th Cir. 1970), which the Board cites, the Fifth Circuit focussed on the context of the misconduct as the key to deciding whether the misconduct was protected by the Act.

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Earle Industries, Inc.

    999 F.2d 1268 (8th Cir. 1993)   Cited 9 times

    No. 92-3228. Submitted April 12, 1993. Decided July 28, 1993. Lisa Richardson, N.L.R.B., Washington, DC, argued, for petitioner. Jeff Weintraub, Memphis, TN, argued, for respondent. Appeal from the National Labor Relations Board. Before WOLLMAN and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges, and STOHR, District Judge. The HONORABLE DONALD J. STOHR, United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, sitting by designation. WOLLMAN, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board applies

  8. Miera v. N.L.R.B

    982 F.2d 441 (10th Cir. 1992)   Cited 6 times

    Nos. 91-9573, 92-9506. December 29, 1992. Paul J. Kennedy, Albuquerque, NM, for petitioners. Howard E. Perlstein, Supervisory Atty., John H. Fawley, Attorney, Jerry M. Hunter, General Counsel, and Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputy Associate General Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, DC, for respondents. John V. Jansonius and Jill J. Weinberg of Haynes and Boone, L.L.P., Dallas, TX, for intervenor. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before McKAY, Chief Judge, SEYMOUR, and KELLY, Circuit

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Adams Delivery Serv., Inc.

    623 F.2d 96 (9th Cir. 1980)   Cited 7 times

    No. 79-7050. July 10, 1980. Howard E. Perlstein, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Alan S. Levins, Littler, Mendelson, Fastiff Tichy, San Francisco, Cal., argued, Paula Gold, San Francisco, Cal., on brief, for respondent. On Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Before ANDERSON, SCHROEDER and FARRIS, Circuit Judges. J. BLAINE ANDERSON, Circuit Judge: The N.L.R.B. petitions for enforcement of its order requiring respondent Adams Delivery Service, Inc., to reinstate

  10. F. W. Woolworth Co. v. N.L.R.B

    655 F.2d 151 (8th Cir. 1981)   Cited 1 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Excusing employee's conduct as impulsive