§

Merrill Iron & Steel, Inc.

335 N.L.R.B. 171 (N.L.R.B. 2001)
Merrill Iron & Steel, Inc.

26 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. McClain of Georgia, Inc.

    138 F.3d 1418 (11th Cir. 1998)   Cited 279 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding in a National Labor Relations Act case that a showing that an employee's involvement in union activity was a motivating factor in the discharge of that employee creates an inference of anti-union animus; the employer can then raise the claim that the employee would have been discharged even had he not engaged in union activity as an affirmative defense

  2. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  3. N.L.R.B. v. Western Temporary Services, Inc.

    821 F.2d 1258 (7th Cir. 1987)   Cited 48 times
    Finding a joint employer relationship where the company could "refuse a referral" but also where the company had "exclusive control over the day-to-day activities of the part-time workers who [were] referred to it" including "train[ing], assign[ing] work, and supervis[ing] them."

  4. Howell Chev. Co. v. Labor Board

    346 U.S. 482 (1953)   Cited 38 times
    Holding that a car retailer is subject to Commerce Clause as an "'integral part' of General Motors' national system of distribution."

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. American Postal Workers Union

    618 F.2d 1249 (8th Cir. 1980)   Cited 48 times
    In National Labor Relations Bd. v. Postal Workers (C.A.8, 1980), 618 F.2d 1249, 1255, the Eighth Circuit held that "`[a]rbitrary conduct alone may suffice to establish a violation of the duty of fair representation' but that `[m]ere negligence, poor judgment or ineptitude are insufficient to establish a breach of the duty of fair representation.'"

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Dorothy Shamrock Coal Co.

    833 F.2d 1263 (7th Cir. 1987)   Cited 34 times
    Stating that "comments demonstrate a `manifest hostility' toward union activity . . . are relevant in determining the Company's motive for its conduct"

  7. Abilene Sheet Metal, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    619 F.2d 332 (5th Cir. 1980)   Cited 42 times
    Finding substantial evidence to affirm the conclusion that a company foreman was a supervisor

  8. N.L.R.B. v. Fort Vancouver Plywood Co.

    604 F.2d 596 (9th Cir. 1979)   Cited 42 times
    In Fort Vancouver, we noted that the Board's order required the reinstatement of exactly 72 discharged workers, leaving no possibility for the employer to litigate whether or not the workers would have been laid off in spite of the violations.

  9. Woods v. United States

    724 F.2d 1444 (9th Cir. 1984)   Cited 33 times
    Holding state liable to United States Department of Agriculture for local violations of Food Stamp Act

  10. Schaeff Inc. v. National Labor Relations Bd.

    113 F.3d 264 (D.C. Cir. 1997)   Cited 13 times

    No. 96-1190 Argued February 10, 1997 Decided May 27, 1997 Gerald M. Richardson, St. Louis, MO, argued the cause, for petitioner. Angela M. Washington, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause, for respondent. Linda R. Sher, Associate General Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputy Associate General Counsel, and Frederick C. Havard, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, were on brief. David A. Seid, Attorney, Washington, DC, National Labor Relations Board, entered an appearance