§

Laurel Bay Health & Rehabilitation Center

353 N.L.R.B. 232 (N.L.R.B. 2008)
Laurel Bay Health & Rehabilitation Center

10 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 712 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding 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"

  2. Metropolitan Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    460 U.S. 693 (1983)   Cited 314 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union may, under certain circumstances, waive members' NLRA rights

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.

    385 U.S. 432 (1967)   Cited 265 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Approving "discovery-type standard"

  4. Charles D. Bonanno Linen Service, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    454 U.S. 404 (1982)   Cited 116 times
    Holding that courts must not "substitute [their] judgment for those of the Board with respect to the issues that Congress intended the Board should resolve"

  5. American Federation of Television & Radio Artists v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    395 F.2d 622 (D.C. Cir. 1968)   Cited 103 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Applying Taft

  6. Huck Mfg. Co. v. NLRB

    693 F.2d 1176 (5th Cir. 1983)   Cited 29 times
    Finding of no impasse supported by fact that "Union's chief negotiator testified that he never felt the parties were at an impasse"

  7. McClatchy Newspapers, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    131 F.3d 1026 (D.C. Cir. 1997)   Cited 11 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that agencies are entitled to deviate from reasoning used in prior decisions

  8. Local 13, Detroit Newspaper, Etc. v. N.L.R.B

    598 F.2d 267 (D.C. Cir. 1979)   Cited 24 times
    Clarifying that the good-faith requirement applies both to employer and union

  9. North Star Steel Co. v. N.L.R.B

    974 F.2d 68 (8th Cir. 1992)   Cited 1 times

    Nos. 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

  10. N.L.R.B. v. H H Pretzel Co.

    831 F.2d 650 (6th Cir. 1987)   Cited 4 times
    In H H Pretzel, the employer had made clear to the union that it had to achieve substantial labor cost savings in order to survive.