North American Dismantling Corp.

11 Cited authorities

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."
Labor Bd. v. Washington Aluminum Co.
370 U.S. 9 (1962) Cited 206 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections
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
Dayton Typographic Service, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
778 F.2d 1188 (6th Cir. 1985) Cited 25 times
Finding the employer's "lack of work" defense unconvincing where the employer hired two new employees to do part-time work in the same department as the discharged employee
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co., Inc. of Delaware
651 F.2d 442 (6th Cir. 1981) Cited 28 times
In NLRB v. Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co., 651 F.2d 442 (6th Cir. 1981), the court recited the Wright Line test but did not analyze it.
N.L.R.B. v. Ridgeway Trucking Co.
622 F.2d 1222 (5th Cir. 1980) Cited 24 times
In NLRB v. Ridgeway Trucking Co., 622 F.2d 1222, 1223-24 (5th Cir. 1980), we stated that "[t]he test of whether an employee was discharged depends upon the reasonable inferences that the employees could draw from the language used by the employer."
N.L.R.B. v. Hale Mfg. Co., Inc.
570 F.2d 705 (8th Cir. 1978) Cited 18 times
Finding that an actual termination occurred where the employer did not regard the employee as fired
JMC Transport, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
776 F.2d 612 (6th Cir. 1985) Cited 8 times
Nos. 84-5960, 84-6060. Argued August 22, 1985. Decided November 12, 1985. D. Patton Pelfrey, Charles E. Allen, III (argued), Brown, Todd and Heyburn, James H. Massey, Mark B. Davis, Jr., Louisville, Ky., for petitioner. Elliott Moore, Elinor Stillman (argued), Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before MERRITT and WELLFORD, Circuit Judges, and CELEBREZZE, Senior Circuit Judge. MERRITT, Circuit Judge
N.L.R.B. v. Trumbull Asphalt Co. of Delaware
327 F.2d 841 (8th Cir. 1964) Cited 31 times
Holding that "[t]he fact of discharge . . . does not depend on the use of formal words of firing. It is sufficient if the words or actions of the employer 'would logically lead a prudent person to believe his tenure had been terminated.'"
N.L.R.B. v. Cent. Okla. Milk Producers Ass'n
285 F.2d 495 (10th Cir. 1960) Cited 24 times 1 Legal Analyses
Granting enforcement of N.L.R.B. order finding milk tank-truck drivers entitled to overtime under FLSA where drivers were employed by separate trucking entity owned by dairy association

North American Dismantling Corp.

11 Cited authorities

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."

Holding that certain employee conduct crosses the line from protected activity to "indefensible" conduct that loses NLRA protections

Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

Finding the employer's "lack of work" defense unconvincing where the employer hired two new employees to do part-time work in the same department as the discharged employee

In NLRB v. Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co., 651 F.2d 442 (6th Cir. 1981), the court recited the Wright Line test but did not analyze it.

In NLRB v. Ridgeway Trucking Co., 622 F.2d 1222, 1223-24 (5th Cir. 1980), we stated that "[t]he test of whether an employee was discharged depends upon the reasonable inferences that the employees could draw from the language used by the employer."

Finding that an actual termination occurred where the employer did not regard the employee as fired

Holding that "[t]he fact of discharge . . . does not depend on the use of formal words of firing. It is sufficient if the words or actions of the employer 'would logically lead a prudent person to believe his tenure had been terminated.'"

Granting enforcement of N.L.R.B. order finding milk tank-truck drivers entitled to overtime under FLSA where drivers were employed by separate trucking entity owned by dairy association