§

La Gloria Oil and Gas Company

337 N.L.R.B. 1120 (N.L.R.B. 2002)
La Gloria Oil and Gas Company

12 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    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."

  2. Labor Board v. Walton Mfg. Co.

    369 U.S. 404 (1962)   Cited 298 times
    Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"

  3. 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

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Browning-Ferris Industries of Pennsylvania, Inc.

    691 F.2d 1117 (3d Cir. 1982)   Cited 339 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that joint employer situation exists only when "two or more employers exert significant control over the same employees . . . [where] they share or co-determine those matters governing essential terms and conditions of employment"

  5. Central Transport Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    997 F.2d 1180 (7th Cir. 1993)   Cited 22 times
    In Central Transport the court rejected the Board's finding that Central had a joint employer duty to bargain with employees it leased from Big John Inc. because the union's representation petition and the Board's representation certification named only Big John Inc. as the employer.

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Big Three Industries, Inc.

    497 F.2d 43 (5th Cir. 1974)   Cited 41 times
    Holding that it was of "some relevance" that the employee was not "afforded a reasonable opportunity to explain the full circumstances of what occurred"

  7. New River Industries, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    945 F.2d 1290 (4th Cir. 1991)   Cited 7 times
    Holding that dress codes are a "condition[] of employment which employees may seek to improve" while receiving the safeguards of the NLRA

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Rubin

    424 F.2d 748 (2d Cir. 1970)   Cited 13 times

    No. 451, Docket 33820. Argued March 31, 1970. Decided April 17, 1970. Julius Rosenbaum, Washington, D.C., Attorney (Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Assistant General Counsel, Eugene B. Granof, Atty., on the brief), for petitioner. Leon M. Labes, New York City (Auerbach Labes, New York City, on the brief), for respondent. Before KAUFMAN and FEINBERG, Circuit Judges, and TIMBERS, District Judge. Chief Judge of the District of Connecticut

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Izzi

    395 F.2d 241 (1st Cir. 1968)   Cited 8 times

    No. 6459. May 14, 1968. Edward E. Wall, Washington, D.C., with whom Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, was on motion, Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Elliott Moore, Atty., N.L.R.B., for petitioner. Sidney A. Coven, Boston, Mass., for respondent. Before ALDRICH, Chief Judge, McENTEE and COFFIN, Circuit Judges. ALDRICH, Chief Judge. Respondent, an individual employer, having wrongfully refused to reinstate some fifteen truck drivers, Patrick

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Sutherland Lumber Company

    452 F.2d 67 (7th Cir. 1971)   Cited 3 times

    No. 18932. November 16, 1971. Rehearing Denied December 14, 1971. Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Avrum Marcus Goldberg, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, William F. Wachter, Susan J. Sherman, Attys., N.L.R.B., for petitioner. Robert C. Canfield, Carl E. Enggas, Allan L. Bioff, Kansas City, Mo., for respondent; Watson, Ess, Marshall Enggas, Kansas City, Mo., of counsel. Before KILEY and FAIRCHILD, Circuit Judges