§

Manna Pro Partners

304 N.L.R.B. 782 (N.L.R.B. 1991)
Manna Pro Partners

11 Cited authorities

  1. Fall River Dyeing & Finishing Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    482 U.S. 27 (1987)   Cited 372 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the new employer must bargain with the old union, if the new employer is a true successor, and discussing factors

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Burns International Security Services, Inc.

    406 U.S. 272 (1972)   Cited 480 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a successor is not bound to substantive terms of previous collective bargaining agreement

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Curtin Matheson Scientific, Inc.

    494 U.S. 775 (1990)   Cited 177 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Board has "considerable deference" in determining the legal rule to apply and should be upheld "as long as it is rational and consistent with the Act"

  4. Texas Petrochemicals Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    923 F.2d 398 (5th Cir. 1991)   Cited 19 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Describing the duty of the employer to rebut the presumption of majority status by conducting a poll in accordance with the required procedural safeguards

  5. Terrell Machine Company v. N.L.R.B

    427 F.2d 1088 (4th Cir. 1970)   Cited 47 times

    No. 13371. Argued December 2, 1969. Decided January 20, 1970. William W. Sturges, Charlotte, N.C. (Weinstein, Waggoner, Sturges Odom, Charlotte, N.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Thomas E. Silfen, Atty., N.L.R.B. (Arnold Ordman, General Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate General Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. General Counsel, and John D. Burgoyne, Atty., N.L.R.B., on the brief), for respondent. Before SOBELOFF and WINTER, Circuit Judges, and HARVEY, District Judge. WINTER, Circuit Judge:

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Windham Community Memorial Hosp

    577 F.2d 805 (2d Cir. 1978)   Cited 26 times
    Approving Board presumption

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Buckley Broadcasting Corp.

    891 F.2d 230 (9th Cir. 1989)   Cited 13 times
    Giving dispositive weight to the third factor, noting, “Buckley's argument fails under the third factor. There is no possibility of an inequitable result from retroactive application of the Board's new standard because the new standard works to Buckley's advantage.”

  8. Hajoca Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    872 F.2d 1169 (3d Cir. 1989)   Cited 11 times
    Holding that "the presumption of majority status survives the expiration of a collective bargaining agreement"

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Fall River Dyeing Finishing Corp.

    775 F.2d 425 (1st Cir. 1985)   Cited 7 times

    No. 85-1019. Argued June 6, 1985. Decided October 18, 1985. Ira Drogin, New York City, with whom Leaf, Sternklar Drogin, New York City, was on brief for respondent. William M. Bernstein, Washington, D.C., with whom Elinor Hadley Stillman, Rosemary M. Collyer, Gen. Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel, Robert E. Allen, Associate Gen. Counsel, and Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C., were on brief for petitioner. Petition from the National Labor Relations Board

  10. American Boiler Manufacturers v. N.L.R.B

    366 F.2d 815 (8th Cir. 1966)   Cited 21 times
    In American Boiler, the complaint alleged a fabrication clause in a collective-bargaining contract was being unlawfully applied by the parties, but the issue of legality of the clause was not passed on by the Board, even though the validity of the clause would be dispositive and was fully litigated by the parties; this Court remanded to the Board to determine the legality of the clause.