§

Made 4 Film, Inc.

337 N.L.R.B. 1152 (N.L.R.B. 2002)
Made 4 Film, Inc.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Detroit Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    440 U.S. 301 (1979)   Cited 227 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that NLRB erred in requiring employer to disclose performance test scores of employees as information for collective bargaining, regardless of employee consent, because of the sensitive nature of the test scores

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

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

  3. Labor Board v. Truitt Mfg. Co.

    351 U.S. 149 (1956)   Cited 223 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the duty to produce information relevant to a bargaining issue is derivative from the broader statutory duty to bargain in good-faith

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. C & C Plywood Corp.

    385 U.S. 421 (1967)   Cited 117 times
    Holding that the NLRB has the authority to interpret CBAs in the first instance where its interpretation is for the purpose of “enforc[ing] a statutory right which Congress considered necessary to allow labor and management to get on with the process of reaching fair terms and conditions of employment”

  5. Hinson v. N.L.R.B

    428 F.2d 133 (8th Cir. 1970)   Cited 81 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Section 302 "does not comprehend solely a collective bargaining agreement to the exclusion of any other possible written agreement"

  6. N.L.R.B. v. McClatchy Newspapers, Inc.

    964 F.2d 1153 (D.C. Cir. 1992)   Cited 27 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Concluding that Toledo and Idaho Statesman emanate from Borg-Warner

  7. Peerless Roofing Co., Ltd. v. N.L.R.B

    641 F.2d 734 (9th Cir. 1981)   Cited 42 times
    Holding that the requirements of § 302(c) were satisfied when contributions were made pursuant to expired collective bargaining agreements

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Int'l Bro. of Elec Wkrs., Local 11

    772 F.2d 571 (9th Cir. 1985)   Cited 9 times

    No. 84-7439. Argued and Submitted March 4, 1985. Decided September 24, 1985. William R. Stewart, Deputy Asst. Gen. Counsel, Frederick Havard, Atty., Washington, D.C., for petitioner N.L.R.B. Robert Newman, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioners-intervenors Loveall, Sokol and Mott. Elizabeth R. Lishner, Davis, Frommer Jesinger, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent. Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Before GOODWIN, FLETCHER and PREGERSON, Circuit Judges. GOODWIN

  9. Section 102.11 - Signature; sworn; declaration

    29 C.F.R. § 102.11   Cited 1 times

    Charges must be in writing and signed, and either must be sworn to before a notary public, Board agent, or other person duly authorized by law to administer oaths and take acknowledgments or must contain a declaration by the person signing it, under the penalty of perjury that its contents are true and correct (see 28 U.S.C. 1746 ). 29 C.F.R. §102.11 82 FR 11754 , 3/6/2017