§

National Steel Supply, Inc.

02-CA-036457 (N.L.R.B. Dec. 23, 2004)
National Steel Supply, Inc.

7 Cited authorities

  1. 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"

  2. National Labor Rel. B. v. Kentucky R. Comm. C

    532 U.S. 706 (2001)   Cited 181 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the burden of proving a statutory exception generally falls on the party who claims a benefit

  3. Mastro Plastics Corp. v. Labor Board

    350 U.S. 270 (1956)   Cited 403 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that collective-bargaining agreement "must be read as a whole and in light of the law relating to it when it was made"

  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. Laidlaw Corporation v. N.L.R.B

    414 F.2d 99 (7th Cir. 1969)   Cited 81 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that while an employer is not obligated to discharge permanent replacements to make room for returning economic strikers, the employer must place the former strikers on a preferential recall list

  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. Beverly Enterprises-Massachusetts, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    165 F.3d 960 (D.C. Cir. 1999)   Cited 17 times
    Concluding that charge nurses were not supervisors