Holding that, in administrative proceedings, notice “is sufficient if the [petitioner] understood the issue and was afforded full opportunity to justify its conduct during the course of the litigation”
In Vincent Industrial, we directed the Board to premise every bargaining order on an "explicit[ balanc[ing][of] three considerations: (1) the employees' Section 7 rights [ 29 U.S.C. § 157]; (2) whether other purposes of the [NLRA] override the rights of employees to choose their bargaining representatives; and (3) whether alternative remedies are adequate to remedy the violations of the [NLRA]]."
In Snell Island SNF LLC v. National Labor Relations Board, 568 F.3d 410 (2d Cir. 2009), we held that two Board members may exercise the Board's authority in such circumstances as a quorum of a three-member delegate group, overridden that holding in New Process Steel, L.P. v. National Labor Relations Board, ___ U.S. ___, 130 S.Ct. 2635, ___ L.Ed.2d ___, 2010 WL 2400089 (2010).
In New Process Steel, L.P. v. NLRB, 564 F.3d 840 (7th Cir. 2009), the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit concluded that a two-member panel of the NLRB — the same panel that adjudicated the instant case — "had authority to hear the labor dispute," id. at 848.
Noting that, "[b]ecause affirmative bargaining orders interfere with the employee free choice that is a core principle of the Act," we "view them with suspicion" and demand special justification for them
In Northeastern Land Services v. NLRB, 560 F.3d 36 (1st Cir. 2009), the court held that, "[t]he Board's delegation of its institutional power to a panel that ultimately consisted of a two-member quorum because of a vacancy was lawful under the plain text of section 3(b)."