Flamingo Hilton-Laughlin

11 Cited authorities

Linn v. Plant Guard Workers
383 U.S. 53 (1966) Cited 732 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding as preempted all defamation actions in labor disputes except those published with actual malice
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
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. Babcock Wilcox Co.
351 U.S. 105 (1956) Cited 294 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot
Guardian Industries Corp. v. N.L.R.B
49 F.3d 317 (7th Cir. 1995) Cited 16 times 2 Legal Analyses
Nos. 94-2388, 94-2664. Argued January 18, 1995. Decided February 28, 1995. Todd M. Nierman (argued), Michael R. Maine, Baker Daniels, Indianapolis, IN, for petitioner. Charles P. Donnelly, Jr., Joseph Oertel (argued), N.L.R.B., Contempt Litigation Branch, Aileen A. Armstrong, N.L.R.B., Appellate Court, Enforcement Litigation, Washington, DC, Saudria Bordone, Joanne Krause, N.L.R.B., Region 25, Indianapolis, IN, for respondent. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before COFFEY
N.L.R.B. v. Southern Maryland Hosp. Center
916 F.2d 932 (4th Cir. 1990) Cited 17 times
Noting that “the Board has on several occasions found that employers unreasonably chilled the exercise of their employees' Section 7 rights through excessive surveillance”
United Parcel Service v. N.L.R.B
41 F.3d 1068 (6th Cir. 1994) Cited 7 times 1 Legal Analyses
In United Parcel Serv. v. NLRB, 41 F.3d 1068 (6th Cir. 1994), we held that the employer's refusal to allow employees to wear union pins, while allowing the wearing of other pins, did not constitute discrimination in violation of Section(s) 8(a)(1).
Burger King Corp. v. N.L.R.B
725 F.2d 1053 (6th Cir. 1984) Cited 17 times
Noting that the challenged policy must be enforced in a “consistent and nondiscriminatory fashion”
Eastern Omni Constr. Inc. v. National Labor
170 F.3d 418 (4th Cir. 1999) Cited 2 times
Finding valid safety concerns justified the ban on union decals on hardhats
N.L.R.B. v. Honeywell, Inc.
722 F.2d 405 (8th Cir. 1983) Cited 8 times 1 Legal Analyses
In Honeywell the employer maintained two bulletin boards: one contained notices for company-sponsored organizations and activities, and the other contained employees' notices for work-related activities — except for unions.

Flamingo Hilton-Laughlin

11 Cited authorities

Holding as preempted all defamation actions in labor disputes except those published with actual malice

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

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

Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot

Noting that “the Board has on several occasions found that employers unreasonably chilled the exercise of their employees' Section 7 rights through excessive surveillance”

In United Parcel Serv. v. NLRB, 41 F.3d 1068 (6th Cir. 1994), we held that the employer's refusal to allow employees to wear union pins, while allowing the wearing of other pins, did not constitute discrimination in violation of Section(s) 8(a)(1).

Noting that the challenged policy must be enforced in a “consistent and nondiscriminatory fashion”

Finding valid safety concerns justified the ban on union decals on hardhats

In Honeywell the employer maintained two bulletin boards: one contained notices for company-sponsored organizations and activities, and the other contained employees' notices for work-related activities — except for unions.