§

LABORERS DISTRICT COUNCIL OF MINNESOTA AND NORTH DAKOTA (Lake Area Fence, Inc.)

357 N.L.R.B. 290 (N.L.R.B. 2011)
LABORERS DISTRICT COUNCIL OF MINNESOTA AND NORTH DAKOTA (Lake Area Fence, Inc.)

10 Cited authorities

  1. Fibreboard Corp. v. Labor Board

    379 U.S. 203 (1964)   Cited 731 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA

  2. Labor Board v. Denver Bldg. Council

    341 U.S. 675 (1951)   Cited 494 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Board's assertion of jurisdiction over activities taking place at local construction site based on finding that "any widespread application of the practices charged might well result in substantially decreasing" the flow of interstate commerce

  3. H. K. Porter Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    397 U.S. 99 (1970)   Cited 222 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the NLRB is "without power to compel a company or a union to agree to any substantive contractual provision of a collective-bargaining agreement."

  4. Teamsters Union v. Morton

    377 U.S. 252 (1964)   Cited 254 times
    Holding that although the NLRA neither prohibits nor protects secondary boycotts, which function as a form of self-help available to unions to aid them in reaching their bargaining goals during negotiations, state-law attempts to regulate them are preempted because use of the boycott was part of the balance struck by Congress between the conflicting interests of the union, the employees, the employer, and the community; exceptions are when the type of conduct constitutes an imminent threat to public order or implicates deeply rooted local concerns

  5. Electrical Workers v. Labor Board

    341 U.S. 694 (1951)   Cited 246 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the prohibition of picketing in furtherance of unlawful objectives is not an abridgement of free speech

  6. International Ass'n of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Local 3 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    843 F.2d 770 (3d Cir. 1988)   Cited 119 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding review of the Board's decision to apply a new rule of law retrospectively is deferential and that the Board's ruling will be disturbed only if it wreaks manifest injustice

  7. Labor Board v. Servette

    377 U.S. 46 (1964)   Cited 74 times
    Holding under section 8(b) of the Act, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b), that statutory protection for the distribution of handbills would be undermined if a threat to engage in protected conduct were not itself protected

  8. Sheet Metal Workers' Intl. Ass'n v. N.L.R.B

    989 F.2d 515 (D.C. Cir. 1993)   Cited 7 times

    No. 91-1642. Argued January 25, 1993. Decided April 6, 1993. Donald W. Fisher, Toledo, OH, with whom Samuel C. McKnight, Southfield, MI, and Judith E. Rivlin, Washington, DC, were on the brief, for petitioners. Julie Broido, Atty., N.L.R.B., with whom Jerry M. Hunter, Gen. Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, and Peter Winkler, Supervisory Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, DC, were on the brief, for respondent. Petition for Review of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board

  9. Ryan Heating Co., Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    942 F.2d 1287 (8th Cir. 1991)   Cited 7 times
    Employing different but similar formulation

  10. Carpet, Linoleum, Soft Tile, Loc. 419 v. NLRB

    467 F.2d 392 (D.C. Cir. 1972)   Cited 14 times

    No. 71-1320. Argued April 19, 1972. Decided July 28, 1972. Mr. David S. Barr, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Philip Hornbein, Jr., Denver, Colo., was on the brief, for petitioner. Mr. Baruch A. Fellner, Atty., N.L.R.B., with whom Messrs. Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, and Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., were on the brief, for respondent. Mr. Kalvin M. Grove, Chicago, Ill., for intervenor. Mr. Harry L. Browne, Kansas City, Mo., filed a brief on behalf of the American