§

Herbert F. Darling, Inc.

287 N.L.R.B. 1356 (N.L.R.B. 1988)
Herbert F. Darling, Inc.

18 Cited authorities

  1. Chevron U.S.A. v. Natural Res. Def. Council

    467 U.S. 837 (1984)   Cited 16,216 times   616 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts "must give effect to the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress"

  2. Securities Comm'n v. Chenery Corp.

    332 U.S. 194 (1947)   Cited 4,198 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that if the agency rests its decision on "grounds are inadequate or improper, the court is powerless to affirm the administrative action by substituting what it considers to be a more adequate or proper basis"

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. Weingarten, Inc.

    420 U.S. 251 (1975)   Cited 434 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer commits an unfair labor practice by compelling an employee to attend an investigatory meeting that could lead to discipline without allowing the employee to bring a union witness

  4. Ford Motor Co. (Chicago Stamping Plant) v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    441 U.S. 488 (1979)   Cited 288 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that proposal concerning in-plant cafeteria prices was within duty to bargain despite fact that prices were set by third-party supplier rather than employer

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. City Disposal Systems, Inc.

    465 U.S. 822 (1984)   Cited 206 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "lone employee's invocation of a right grounded in his collective-bargaining agreement is . . . a concerted activity in a very real sense" because the employee is in effect reminding his employer of the power of the group that brought about the agreement and that could be reharnessed if the employer refuses to respect the employee's objection

  6. Eastex, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    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

  7. 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."

  8. Prill v. N.L.R.B

    755 F.2d 941 (D.C. Cir. 1985)   Cited 80 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Prill v. NLRB, 755 F.2d 941, 948 (D.C. Cir. 1985), the D.C. Circuit remanded a case to the agency because "a regulation [was] based on an incorrect view of applicable law."

  9. New York Coun., Ass'n of Civ. Tech v. F.L.R.A

    757 F.2d 502 (2d Cir. 1985)   Cited 47 times
    Finding the "direct and integral relationship" test consistent with congressional intent to make § 7106(b) a narrow exception to the duty to bargain

  10. 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”