FlexFrac Logistics/Silver Eagle Logistics

8 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. Romano v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith

    487 U.S. 1205 (1988)   Cited 105 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption
  3. 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
  4. Flex Frac Logistics, L.L.C. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    746 F.3d 205 (5th Cir. 2014)   Cited 30 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a workplace rule preventing employees from discussing wage information violates § 8
  5. Double Eagle Hotel Casino v. N.L.R.B

    414 F.3d 1249 (10th Cir. 2005)   Cited 10 times
    Sustaining Board invalidation of policy defining "confidential information" to include salary information
  6. Prill v. N.L.R.B

    835 F.2d 1481 (D.C. Cir. 1987)   Cited 27 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that an employee takes concerted action “when he acts with the actual participation or on the authority of his co-workers”
  7. Chinese v. Natl. Labor

    224 F. App'x 6 (D.C. Cir. 2007)   1 Legal Analyses

    Nos. 06-1159, 06-1206. April 24, 2007. On Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Steven D. Atkinson, Atkinson, Andelson, Loya, Ruud Romo, Cerritos, CA, for Petitioner. Robert J. Englehart, Attorney, Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputy Associate General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Assistant General Counsel, Ronald E. Meisburg, David A. Fleischer, Senior Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, (NLRB) General Counsel, Washington, DC, for

  8. Mushroom Transportation Company v. N.L.R.B

    330 F.2d 683 (3d Cir. 1964)   Cited 48 times
    In Mushroom Transportation Co. v. NLRB, 330 F.2d 683, 685 (3d Cir. 1964), we held that to qualify as concerted activity "it must appear at the very least that [the conduct] was engaged in with the object of initiating or inducing or preparing for group action or that it had some relation to group action in the interest of the employees."