§

LEGGETT & PLATT, INC.

367 N.L.R.B. 51 (N.L.R.B. 2018)
LEGGETT & PLATT, INC.

12 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 711 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. First National Maintenance Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    452 U.S. 666 (1981)   Cited 270 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer has no duty to bargain over a decision to shut down part of its business purely for economic reasons

  3. Auciello Iron Works, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    517 U.S. 781 (1996)   Cited 59 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that NLRB is due "considerable deference . . . by virtue of its charge to develop national labor policy"

  4. Vincent Industrial Plastics, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    209 F.3d 727 (D.C. Cir. 2000)   Cited 44 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Vincent Industrial, we directed the Board to premise every bargaining order on an "explicit[ balanc[ing][of] three considerations: (1) the employees' Section 7 rights [ 29 U.S.C. § 157]; (2) whether other purposes of the [NLRA] override the rights of employees to choose their bargaining representatives; and (3) whether alternative remedies are adequate to remedy the violations of the [NLRA]]."

  5. Lee Lumber & Building Material Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    117 F.3d 1454 (D.C. Cir. 1997)   Cited 27 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Noting that, "[b]ecause affirmative bargaining orders interfere with the employee free choice that is a core principle of the Act," we "view them with suspicion" and demand special justification for them

  6. Exxel/Atmos, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    28 F.3d 1243 (D.C. Cir. 1994)   Cited 28 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stressing appropriateness of bargaining order to remedy bad faith bargaining during certification year

  7. Scomas of Sausalito, LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    849 F.3d 1147 (D.C. Cir. 2017)   Cited 3 times   2 Legal Analyses

    No. 15-1412 C/w 15-1476 03-07-2017 SCOMAS OF SAUSALITO, LLC, Petitioner v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent UNITE HERE, Local 2850, Intervenor Diane Aqui, Santa Rosa, CA, argued the cause and filed briefs for the petitioner. Heather S. Beard, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for the respondent. Richard F. Griffin, Jr., General Counsel, Jennifer Abruzzo, Deputy General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Associate General Counsel, Linda Dreeben, Deputy Associate General

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Miller Waste Mills

    315 F.3d 951 (8th Cir. 2003)   Cited 8 times

    No. 01-3073. Submitted: October 7, 2002. Filed: January 10, 2003. David A. Seid, argued, Washington, DC (Sharon I. Block, Arthur F. Rosenfeld, John E. Higgins, Jr., John H. Ferguson, Aileen A. Armstrong, on the brief), for petitioner. Lee A. Lastovich, argued, Minneapolis, MN (Paul J. Zech, on the brief), for respondent. Before HANSEN, Chief Judge, and HEANEY and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges. HEANEY, Circuit Judge. The National Labor Relations Board petitions this court to enforce its order

  9. N.L.R.B. v. HQJM of Bayside

    518 F.3d 256 (4th Cir. 2008)   Cited 2 times

    No. 06-2253. Argued: December 5, 2007. Decided: March 10, 2008. Appeal from the National Labor Relations Board petitioned for court to enforce its order, 2006 WL 2881901. ARGUED: D. Patton Pelfrey, Frost, Brown, Todd, Louisville, Kentucky, for Respondent. Elizabeth A. Heaney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Carey Robert Butsavage, Butsavage Associates, P.C., Washington, D.C., for Intervenor. ON BRIEF: John T. Lovett, Frost, Brown, Todd, Louisville, Kentucky, for

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ogle Protection Service, Inc.

    444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971)   Cited 3 times   3 Legal Analyses

    No. 21049. June 30, 1971. Stanley R. Zirkin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Stanley R. Zirkin, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Douglas C. Dahn, Detroit, Mich., for respondents; Tolleson, Burgess Mead, Robert D. Welchli, Detroit, Mich., on brief. Before CELEBREZZE, PECK and McCREE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This case is before us a second

  11. Rule 901 - Authenticating or Identifying Evidence

    Fed. R. Evid. 901   Cited 5,335 times   53 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]estimony that a matter is what it is claimed to be" is sufficient authentication