Flex-N-Gate Texas, LLC

13 Cited authorities

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.
462 U.S. 393 (1983) Cited 657 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."
N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.
662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981) Cited 358 times 46 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
Bourne v. N.L.R.B
332 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1964) Cited 93 times 1 Legal Analyses
In Bourne, we held that interrogation which does not contain express threats is not an unfair labor practice unless certain "fairly severe standards" are met showing that the very fact of interrogation was coercive.
Laro Maintenance Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
56 F.3d 224 (D.C. Cir. 1995) Cited 23 times
Inferring discriminatory motive from, inter alia, an employer's professed desire to hire the best qualified workers and the employer's subsequent decision to hire employees with no relevant experience over union members with experience
Jackson Hosp. Corp. v. N.L.R.B
647 F.3d 1137 (D.C. Cir. 2011) Cited 6 times
Explaining that “[l]ong ago” the NLRB “clarified” that an employee has no right to bring a witness to a meeting, the “sole purpose” of which is to deliver a predetermined warning
Shattuck Denn Mining Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
362 F.2d 466 (9th Cir. 1966) Cited 56 times
Upholding Board's determination that discharge for insubordination was pretextual where employer "refused to discharge" another employee also accused of insubordination
Hotel Emp. Restaurant Emp. Un. v. N.L.R.B
760 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1985) Cited 26 times 6 Legal Analyses
Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176
Chelsea Industries, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
285 F.3d 1073 (D.C. Cir. 2002) Cited 8 times 1 Legal Analyses
No. 00-1443. Argued November 1, 2001. Decided April 12, 2002. Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Donald H. Scharg argued the cause for petitioner. On the briefs were Steven J. Fishman and Thomas A. Pinch. Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputy Associate General Counsel, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Arthur F. Rosenfeld, General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Associate General Counsel
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. KDFW-TV, Inc.
790 F.2d 1273 (5th Cir. 1986) Cited 23 times 1 Legal Analyses
Finding substantial evidence that producers, directors, and assignment editors of a television newscast program did not responsibly direct other employees
N.L.R.B. v. Curwood Inc.
397 F.3d 548 (7th Cir. 2005) Cited 4 times 1 Legal Analyses
Discussing differences between expert and lay testimony and concluding that agent's testimony about firearms collection was expert testimony, as it was based on his "training and experience"

Flex-N-Gate Texas, LLC

13 Cited authorities

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."

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

In Bourne, we held that interrogation which does not contain express threats is not an unfair labor practice unless certain "fairly severe standards" are met showing that the very fact of interrogation was coercive.

Inferring discriminatory motive from, inter alia, an employer's professed desire to hire the best qualified workers and the employer's subsequent decision to hire employees with no relevant experience over union members with experience

Explaining that “[l]ong ago” the NLRB “clarified” that an employee has no right to bring a witness to a meeting, the “sole purpose” of which is to deliver a predetermined warning

Upholding Board's determination that discharge for insubordination was pretextual where employer "refused to discharge" another employee also accused of insubordination

Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176

Finding substantial evidence that producers, directors, and assignment editors of a television newscast program did not responsibly direct other employees

Discussing differences between expert and lay testimony and concluding that agent's testimony about firearms collection was expert testimony, as it was based on his "training and experience"