§

E.I. Dupont DeNemours & Co.

05-CA-033461 (N.L.R.B. Aug. 22, 2011)
E.I. Dupont DeNemours & Co.

7 Cited authorities

  1. Chemical Workers v. Pittsburgh Glass

    404 U.S. 157 (1971)   Cited 630 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding retirees are not "employees" within the bargaining unit

  2. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 710 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"

  3. Department of the Navy, Marine Corps Logistics Base v. Federal Labor Relations Authority

    962 F.2d 48 (D.C. Cir. 1992)   Cited 44 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Outlining FLRA position

  4. Southern Nuclear v. N.L.R.B

    524 F.3d 1350 (D.C. Cir. 2008)   Cited 14 times
    Reviewing for language expressly showing a union "relinquishe[d] its right to bargain"

  5. Mississippi Power Co. v. N.L.R.B

    284 F.3d 605 (5th Cir. 2002)   Cited 15 times
    Describing the competing standards

  6. Litton Microwave Cooking Products v. N.L.R.B

    868 F.2d 854 (6th Cir. 1989)   Cited 13 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Stating that courts "will not normally disturb the credibility assessments of the [ARB] or an administrative law judge, `who has observed the demeanor of the witnesses'"

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ogle Protection Service, Inc.

    444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971)   Cited 3 times   3 Legal Analyses

    No. 21049. June 30, 1971. Stanley R. Zirkin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Stanley R. Zirkin, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Douglas C. Dahn, Detroit, Mich., for respondents; Tolleson, Burgess Mead, Robert D. Welchli, Detroit, Mich., on brief. Before CELEBREZZE, PECK and McCREE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This case is before us a second