Matson Terminals

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. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 710 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"
  3. National Woodwork Manufacturers Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    386 U.S. 612 (1967)   Cited 392 times
    Holding that union employees' refusal to install third-party manufacturer's product was not prohibited under § 158(b)(B), because it was an action "pressuring the [union members'] employer for agreements regulating relations between [the employer] and his own employees"
  4. Detroit Typographical Union No. 18 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    216 F.3d 109 (D.C. Cir. 2000)   Cited 8 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Granting petition for review because Board conclusion constituted legal error
  5. N.L.R.B. v. United Technologies Corp.

    884 F.2d 1569 (2d Cir. 1989)   Cited 18 times   2 Legal Analyses

    Nos. 1095, 1096, Dockets 89-4003, 89-4009. Argued May 8, 1989. Decided September 13, 1989. Edward J. Dempsey, Director, Indus. Relations Labor Counsel, United Technologies Corp., Hartford, Conn., for respondent/intervenor United Technologies Corp. Judith P. Flower, Washington, D.C. (Barbara A. Atkin, Supervisory Attorney, Joseph E. Desio, Acting Gen. Counsel, Robert E. Allen, Associate Gen. Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., of counsel), for

  6. Hill-Rom Co., Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    957 F.2d 454 (7th Cir. 1992)   Cited 12 times

    Nos. 89-3721, 90-1236. Argued November 2, 1990. Decided March 6, 1992. William R. Stewart, N.L.R.B., Contempt Litigation Branch, Aileen A. Armstrong, Robert I. Tendrich (argued), N.L.R.B., Appellate Court, Enforcement Litigation, Washington, D.C. William T. Little, James S. Robles, N.L.R.B., Region 25, Indianapolis, Ind., for N.L.R.B. Kenneth J. Yerkes, Robert K. Bellamy (argued), Barnes Thornburg, Indianapolis, Ind., for Hill-Rom Co., Inc. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Bay Shipbuilding Corp.

    721 F.2d 187 (7th Cir. 1983)   Cited 7 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Enforcing 263 N.L.R.B. 1133
  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fry Foods, Inc.

    609 F.2d 267 (6th Cir. 1979)   Cited 9 times

    No. 79-1210. Argued October 3, 1979. Decided November 13, 1979. Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, John Elligers, Supervisor, Joseph Oertel, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., Bernard Levine, Director, Region 8, N.L.R.B., Cleveland, Ohio, for petitioner. Robert Affeldt, Sylvania, Ohio, Michael B. Lange, Tiffan, Ohio, for respondent. Before EDWARDS, Chief Judge, CELEBREZZE, Circuit Judge, and CECIL, Senior Circuit Judge. PER CURIAM. The National Labor Relations Board seeks

  9. N.L.R.B. v. Gold Standard Ent., Inc.

    607 F.2d 1208 (7th Cir. 1979)   Cited 4 times
    In Gold Standard Enterprises, this court discussed in some detail the analysis of "credibility" articulated by Judge Wallace in Penasquitos Village, Inc. v. NLRB, 565 F.2d 1074 (9th Cir. 1977).
  10. Section 10502 - Shipping articles agreements

    46 U.S.C. § 10502   Cited 10 times

    (a) The owner, charterer, managing operator, master, or individual in charge shall make a shipping agreement in writing with each seaman before the seaman commences employment. (b) The agreement shall include the date and hour on which the seaman must be on board to begin the voyage. (c) The agreement may not contain a provision on the allotment of wages or a scale of provisions. (d) Each shipping agreement must be signed by the master or individual in charge or a representative of the owner, charterer