§

Philips Industries, Inc.

295 N.L.R.B. 717 (N.L.R.B. 1989)
Philips Industries, Inc.

22 Cited authorities

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

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 652 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 1,035 times   67 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  3. Hunter Douglas, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    804 F.2d 808 (3d Cir. 1986)   Cited 423 times
    Timing and departure from past practice indicates unlawful motive

  4. Labor Board v. Parts Co.

    375 U.S. 405 (1964)   Cited 213 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”

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

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  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. Shattuck Denn Mining Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    362 F.2d 466 (9th Cir. 1966)   Cited 56 times
    Upholding Board's determination that discharge for insubordination was pretextual where employer "refused to discharge" another employee also accused of insubordination

  8. Hotel Emp. Restaurant Emp. Un. v. N.L.R.B

    760 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1985)   Cited 26 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176

  9. Marathon LeTourneau, Longview Div. v. N.L.R.B

    699 F.2d 248 (5th Cir. 1983)   Cited 24 times
    Holding that enforcing a disciplinary rule unevenly violates the Act

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Rain-Ware, Inc.

    732 F.2d 1349 (7th Cir. 1984)   Cited 20 times
    Concluding that "[t]he timing of the layoffs and warehouse closing provides the strongest support for connecting anti-union sentiment with the layoffs," where the layoffs and warehouse closing closely followed a demand for union recognition

  11. Section 158 - Unfair labor practices

    29 U.S.C. § 158   Cited 10,317 times   84 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355