Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

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."

Eastex, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

Holding that a newsletter that "urg[ed] employees to write their legislators to oppose incorporation of the state 'right-to-work' statute into a revised state constitution," "criticiz[ed] a Presidential veto of an increase in the federal minimum wage and urg[ed] employees to register to vote" was protected concerted activity

Romano v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith

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.

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

Labor Board v. Burnup Sims

Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"

Prill v. N.L.R.B

In Prill v. NLRB, 755 F.2d 941, 948 (D.C. Cir. 1985), the D.C. Circuit remanded a case to the agency because "a regulation [was] based on an incorrect view of applicable law."

In re Vioxx Products Liability Litigation

Finding employer had "significant control" of witness "based on [his] occupation" as an upper-level officer

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Joy Recovery Tech

Concluding that "[i]n this case, timing is everything," where "[t]he closing of the department comes on the heels of the union's organizational activity," including filing a petition for a representation election

Prill v. N.L.R.B

Recognizing that an employee takes concerted action “when he acts with the actual participation or on the authority of his co-workers”

Monserrate v. K.K. Mach. Co.

Section 158 - Unfair labor practices

Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355

Section 152 - Definitions

Defining a supervisor to include “any individual having authority . . . to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibly to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judgment”

Rule 43 - Taking Testimony

Granting a trial judge discretion to appoint an interpreter for trial