12 Cited authorities
Laborers Health & Welfare Trust Fund v. Advanced Lightweight Concrete Co.
484 U.S. 539 (1988) Cited 329 timesHolding that the remedy provided in §§ 515 and 502(g) "is limited to the collection of `promised contributions' and does not confer jurisdiction on district courts to determine whether an employer's unilateral decision to refuse to make post-contract contributions constitutes a violation of the NLRA."
Labor Board v. Katz
369 U.S. 736 (1962) Cited 710 times 29 Legal AnalysesHolding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"
Detroit Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
440 U.S. 301 (1979) Cited 227 times 20 Legal AnalysesHolding that NLRB erred in requiring employer to disclose performance test scores of employees as information for collective bargaining, regardless of employee consent, because of the sensitive nature of the test scores
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.
385 U.S. 432 (1967) Cited 265 times 4 Legal AnalysesApproving "discovery-type standard"
Labor Board v. Truitt Mfg. Co.
351 U.S. 149 (1956) Cited 223 times 8 Legal AnalysesHolding that the duty to produce information relevant to a bargaining issue is derivative from the broader statutory duty to bargain in good-faith
Atrium of Princeton, LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
684 F.3d 1310 (D.C. Cir. 2012) Cited 6 timesRejecting the Board's formulation of the relevant common-law agency standard and effectively applying de novo analysis of the common law
N.L.R.B. v. Can-Am Plum
340 F. App'x 354 (9th Cir. 2009) Cited 1 timesNo. 08-70521. Argued and Submitted June 12, 2009. Filed June 22, 2009. Julie Brock Broido, Supervisory, Joan Elizabeth Hoyte, Esquire, Senior, Linda Dreeben, Assistant General Counsel, Fred B. Jacob, Supervisory, NLRB-National Labor Relations Board, Washington, DC, for Petitioner. Mark Russell Thierman, Thierman Law Firm, Reno, NV, for Respondent. On Petition for Review of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. NLRB No. 32-CA-16097. Before: TROTT, MCKEOWN and IKUTA, Circuit Judges. MEMORANDUM
Ciba-Geigy Pharmaceuticals Div. v. N.L.R.B
722 F.2d 1120 (3d Cir. 1983) Cited 17 timesIn Ciba-Geigy Pharmaceuticals Division v. NLRB, 722 F.2d 1120 (3d Cir. 1983), the court rejected an argument that an "extracontractual residual rights" theory allowed imposition of attendance rules.
North Star Steel Co. v. N.L.R.B
974 F.2d 68 (8th Cir. 1992) Cited 1 timesNos. 91-3437, 91-3673. Submitted May 15, 1992. Decided September 1, 1992. John C. Zwakman, Minneapolis, Minn., argued, for petitioner. William Baudler, Washington, D.C., argued (Paul J. Spielberg, Michael J. Gan, Jerry M. Hunter, D. Randall Frye and Aileen A. Armstrong, on the brief), for respondent. Review of decision of National Labor Relations Board. Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Judge, LAY, Senior Circuit Judge, and BOWMAN, Circuit Judge. RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Judge. This case arises from
E.W. Buschman Co. v. N.L.R.B
820 F.2d 206 (6th Cir. 1987) Cited 3 timesNos. 85-6009, 85-6146. Argued September 22, 1986. Decided June 5, 1987. James L. Childress, William K. Engeman (argued), Taft, Stettinius and Hollister, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner, cross respondent. Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate General Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Margaret Bezou (argued), Suzanne Stocking, Emil C. Farkas, Regional Director, Region 9, N.L.R.B., Cincinnati, Ohio, for respondent, cross petitioner. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before WELLFORD
§ 501. Payment
P.R. Laws tit. 29, § 501 Cited 8 timesSetting forth bonus-payment obligation and requirements