§

O'Keefe Drilling Co.

19-CA-029222 (N.L.R.B. Feb. 18, 2005)
O'Keefe Drilling Co.

9 Cited authorities

  1. Laborers Health & Welfare Trust Fund v. Advanced Lightweight Concrete Co.

    484 U.S. 539 (1988)   Cited 329 times
    Holding that the remedy provided in §§ 515 and 502(g) "is limited to the collection of `promised contributions' and does not confer jurisdiction on district courts to determine whether an employer's unilateral decision to refuse to make post-contract contributions constitutes a violation of the NLRA."

  2. Detroit Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    440 U.S. 301 (1979)   Cited 227 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that NLRB erred in requiring employer to disclose performance test scores of employees as information for collective bargaining, regardless of employee consent, because of the sensitive nature of the test scores

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.

    385 U.S. 432 (1967)   Cited 265 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Approving "discovery-type standard"

  4. Oil, Chemical & Atomic Workers Local Union No. 6-418 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    711 F.2d 348 (D.C. Cir. 1983)   Cited 41 times

    Nos. 82-1418 to 82-1420, 82-1743, 82-1589 and 82-1940. Argued May 5, 1983. Decided June 30, 1983. George H. Cohen, with whom Laurence Gold, Washington, D.C., was on brief, for petitioners, Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers, Local Union No. 6-418, AFL-CIO, et al. George J. Tichy, II, San Francisco, Cal., with whom Robert K. Carrol, San Francisco, Cal., for petitioner, Borden Chemical, A Division of Borden, Inc. Howard A. Crawford, with whom Jack D. Rowe, Kansas City, Mo., was on brief, for petitioner

  5. United States Testing Co. v. N.L.R.B

    160 F.3d 14 (D.C. Cir. 1998)   Cited 18 times
    Rejecting 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

  6. Goodyear Atomic Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    738 F.2d 155 (6th Cir. 1984)   Cited 1 times

    Nos. 83-5407, 83-5509. Argued May 8, 1984. Decided July 3, 1984. John B. Rayson, E.H. Rayson (argued), Kramer, Johnson, Rayson, McVeigh Leake, Knoxville, Tenn., Arthur L. Sutton, Akron, Ohio, for petitioner. Elliott Moore, Gen. Counsel, C.S. Stocking (argued), National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for respondent. Petition for review from the National Labor Relations Board. Before EDWARDS and CONTIE, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. PER CURIAM. This case is before the

  7. Section 1001 - Congressional findings and declaration of policy

    29 U.S.C. § 1001   Cited 20,754 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Noting that ERISA was enacted “to protect ... employee benefit plans and their beneficiaries”

  8. Section 401 - Trust Funds

    42 U.S.C. § 401   Cited 16,868 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Filing No. 14 at 1

  9. Section 1025 - Reporting of participant's benefit rights

    29 U.S.C. § 1025   Cited 143 times
    Requiring that each plan participant who separates from service during the plan year receive a statement describing the nature and the amount and form of his or her deferred vested benefit