15 Cited authorities
Auer v. Robbins
519 U.S. 452 (1997) Cited 2,389 times 100 Legal AnalysesHolding that a federal agency's interpretation of a regulation is controlling where it is not "plainly erroneous or inconsistent with the regulation"
San Diego Unions v. Garmon
359 U.S. 236 (1959) Cited 2,564 times 33 Legal AnalysesHolding that "the States as well as the federal court must defer to the exclusive competence of the National Labor Relations Board" if "an activity is arguably subject to § 7 or § 8 of the [NLRA]"
Detroit Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
440 U.S. 301 (1979) Cited 228 times 20 Legal AnalysesHolding that a union's request for employee aptitude tests was relevant to its claim, but employer's interest in preserving confidentiality was also legitimate, and disclosing the information only upon the employee's written consent was a reasonable accommodation
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.
385 U.S. 432 (1967) Cited 265 times 4 Legal AnalysesApproving "discovery-type standard"
Labor Board v. Truitt Mfg. Co.
351 U.S. 149 (1956) Cited 223 times 8 Legal AnalysesHolding that the duty to produce information relevant to a bargaining issue is derivative from the broader statutory duty to bargain in good-faith
Asarco, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
86 F.3d 1401 (5th Cir. 1996) Cited 22 timesFinding of antiunion animus necessary to finding of section 8 violation
United States Testing Co. v. N.L.R.B
160 F.3d 14 (D.C. Cir. 1998) Cited 18 timesRejecting employer's contention that it had insufficient notice regarding the potential relevance of a union request for individual insurance claims information because "context is everything," and the employer "put on the table" the concern of growing health care costs
N.L.R.B. v. Rockwell-Standard, Trans. Axle
410 F.2d 953 (6th Cir. 1969) Cited 44 timesNo. 18651. May 29, 1969. Leonard M. Wagman, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner, Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Neal J. Conway, Atty., Washington, D.C., on brief. Leonard L. Scheinholtz, Pittsburgh, Pa., for respondent, Jonathan L. Alder, Reed, Smith, Shaw McClay, Pittsburgh, Pa., on brief. Before PHILLIPS, EDWARDS and PECK, Circuit Judges. Judge Edwards took no part in the consideration of decision of this case
Prudential Insurance Company of Am. v. N.L.R.B
412 F.2d 77 (2d Cir. 1969) Cited 34 timesRecognizing that bargaining obligation "extends to . . . the administration of [CBAs] already adopted"
Procter Gamble Mfg. Co. v. N.L.R.B
603 F.2d 1310 (8th Cir. 1979) Cited 17 timesNo. 78-1716. Submitted March 12, 1979. Decided August 23, 1979. Harold S. Freeman of Dinsmore, Shohl, Coates Deupree, Cincinnati, Ohio, argued and Michael S. Glassman, Cincinnati, Ohio, on appendix and briefs, for petitioner. Edward S. Dorsey, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C. argued, and Andrew E. Tranovich, Atty., John S. Irving, Gen. Counsel; John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel; Robert E. Allen, Acting Assoc. Gen. Counsel; and Elliott Moore, Deputy Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Washington, D.C.,
Section 158 - Unfair labor practices
29 U.S.C. § 158 Cited 10,335 times 86 Legal AnalysesGranting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355
Section 164.512 - Uses and disclosures for which an authorization or opportunity to agree or object is not required
45 C.F.R. § 164.512 Cited 1,388 times 123 Legal AnalysesApproving disclosure to health oversight agency of protected health information to determine eligibility for government benefit programs
Section 164.501 - Definitions
45 C.F.R. § 164.501 Cited 192 times 56 Legal AnalysesDefining "health care operations" as including "legal services"