§

M.J. Metal Products

328 N.L.R.B. 1184 (N.L.R.B. 1999)
M.J. Metal Products

13 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 657 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,036 times   71 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  3. Brooks v. Labor Board

    348 U.S. 96 (1954)   Cited 301 times
    Holding that an employer has a duty to bargain in good faith for one year beginning on the date of certification of the bargaining representative by the Board

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

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 358 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  5. Franks Bros. Co. v. Labor Board

    321 U.S. 702 (1944)   Cited 252 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing the legitimacy of the Board's view that the unlawful refusal to bargain collectively with employees' chosen representative disrupts employee morale, deters organizational activities, and discourages membership in unions.

  6. N.L.R.B. v. Jamaica Towing, Inc.

    632 F.2d 208 (2d Cir. 1980)   Cited 50 times
    Holding that "hallmark" violations of NLRA "include such employer misbehavior as the closing of a plant or threats of plant closure or loss of employment, the grant of benefits to employees, or the reassignment, demotion or discharge of union adherents" and lesser violations "include such employer misconduct as interrogating employees regarding their union sympathies, holding out a `carrot' of promised benefits, expressing anti-union resolve, threatening that unionization will result in decreased benefits, or suggesting that physical force might be used to exclude the union"

  7. Flamingo Hilton-Laughlin v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    148 F.3d 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1998)   Cited 15 times
    Concluding that statements such as "loss to employees was an inevitable consequence of their unionizing" are "partisan, but largely permissible"

  8. Charlotte Amphitheater Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    82 F.3d 1074 (D.C. Cir. 1996)   Cited 11 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Noting that all Circuits except the Ninth require the NLRB to consider changed circumstances when issuing Gissel bargaining orders

  9. America's Best Quality Coatings Corp. v. NLRB

    44 F.3d 516 (7th Cir. 1995)   Cited 12 times

    Nos. 93-4039, 94-1173, and 94-1198. Argued October 4, 1994. Decided January 4, 1995. James R. Scott, Alan M. Levy (argued), Lindner Marsack, Milwaukee, WI, for petitioner. John C. Truesdale, Robert J. Englehart, Contempt Litigation Branch, Aileen A. Armstrong, Linda J. Dreeben, Deborah E. Shrager (argued), Appellate Court, Enforcement Litigation, Washington, DC, Joseph A. Szabo, Director, N.L.R.B., Milwaukee, WI, for N.L.R.B. Mary E. Leary (argued), Pittsburgh, PA, Terry Davis, Elizabeth Levie, United

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Gordon

    792 F.2d 29 (2d Cir. 1986)   Cited 13 times
    Enforcing bargaining order after one-hundred percent turnover