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."
437 U.S. 556 (1978) Cited 196 times 13 Legal Analyses
Holding that a newsletter that "urg[ed] employees to write their legislators to oppose incorporation of the state 'right-to-work' statute into a revised state constitution," "criticiz[ed] a Presidential veto of an increase in the federal minimum wage and urg[ed] employees to register to vote" was protected concerted activity
Holding that a challenge to the composition of the National Labor Relations Board under the Recess Appointments Clause was not jurisdictional and could be forfeited if not raised to the Board
Holding that protection from retaliation for "fil[ing] charges or giv[ing] testimony" under the National Labor Relations Act extends to an employee who gave a written sworn statement to an NLRB examiner
Doubting that a company fired its employee for her unprofessional conduct, as it claimed, when that company's investigation into her behavior was "one-sided" and incomplete
613 F. Supp. 2d 288 (E.D.N.Y. 2009) Cited 25 times
Finding personal jurisdiction existed on a motion for summary judgment where the plaintiffs had alleged that the defendants supplied the plaintiff's work to distributors with knowledge that the work would be disseminated in the forum state
Interpreting similar language in 29 C.F.R. § 101.10 as meaning "that the Board's procedures are to be controlled by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as far as practicable" (cleaned up)
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.
In NLRB v. Interboro Contractors, Inc., 388 F.2d 495, 500 (2d Cir. 1967), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit stated that the efforts of an individual employee acting alone to enforce the provisions of a collective bargaining agreement may be deemed "concerted," and thus protected, at least when the individual's interpretation of the agreement has a reasonable basis.