Koronis Parts, Inc.

29 Cited authorities

Beth Israel Hospital v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
437 U.S. 483 (1978) Cited 220 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that, in the context of solicitation rules, such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time
Labor Board v. Babcock Wilcox Co.
351 U.S. 105 (1956) Cited 294 times 19 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot
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
Central Hardware Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
407 U.S. 539 (1972) Cited 142 times 3 Legal Analyses
Finding that retail store parking lot was not "open to the public" and that the retail store could exclude nonemployee union members from parking lot
Tripoli Co., Inc. v. Wella Corp.
400 U.S. 831 (1970) Cited 137 times
Declining to review under Hobbs Act district court's exercise of jurisdiction of claim against Federal Communications Commission because plaintiff-appellant had also filed timely petitions for review with court of appeals
Labor Board v. Electrical Workers
346 U.S. 464 (1953) Cited 125 times 41 Legal Analyses
Upholding discharge where employees publicly disparaged quality of employer's product, with no discernible relationship to pending labor dispute
N.L.R.B. v. Intertherm, Inc.
596 F.2d 267 (8th Cir. 1979) Cited 36 times
Holding that employees have a near-absolute right to wear union insignia in the absence of evidence relating to employee efficiency or plant discipline
Hotel Emp. Restaurant Emp. Un. v. N.L.R.B
760 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1985) Cited 26 times 6 Legal Analyses
Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176
Jas. H. Matthews Co. v. N.L.R.B
354 F.2d 432 (8th Cir. 1966) Cited 54 times
In James H. Matthews Co., supra, the employee in question signed an authorization card. Later the union received a letter, postmarked 11 days after the effective date for determining majority status of the union, requesting return of the employee's authorization card. Allegedly, the letter was neither written, dated, nor addressed by the employee and was originally left with an undisclosed person.
Justak Bros. and Co., Inc. v. N.L.R.B
664 F.2d 1074 (7th Cir. 1981) Cited 29 times
Disallowing an employer to seize upon turnover, for otherwise "an employer could engage in a scheme of unfair labor practices and yet escape a bargaining order by delaying and waiting for employee turnover"

Koronis Parts, Inc.

29 Cited authorities

Holding that, in the context of solicitation rules, such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time

Holding that the Board could not require an employer to allow non-employee union representatives to enter the employer's parking lot

Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

Finding that retail store parking lot was not "open to the public" and that the retail store could exclude nonemployee union members from parking lot

Declining to review under Hobbs Act district court's exercise of jurisdiction of claim against Federal Communications Commission because plaintiff-appellant had also filed timely petitions for review with court of appeals

Upholding discharge where employees publicly disparaged quality of employer's product, with no discernible relationship to pending labor dispute

Holding that employees have a near-absolute right to wear union insignia in the absence of evidence relating to employee efficiency or plant discipline

Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176

Disallowing an employer to seize upon turnover, for otherwise "an employer could engage in a scheme of unfair labor practices and yet escape a bargaining order by delaying and waiting for employee turnover"