§

Precision Window Mfg.

303 N.L.R.B. 946 (N.L.R.B. 1991)
Precision Window Mfg.

6 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. Bourne v. N.L.R.B

    332 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1964)   Cited 93 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Bourne, we held that interrogation which does not contain express threats is not an unfair labor practice unless certain "fairly severe standards" are met showing that the very fact of interrogation was coercive.

  4. Mushroom Transportation Company v. N.L.R.B

    330 F.2d 683 (3d Cir. 1964)   Cited 48 times
    In Mushroom Transportation Co. v. NLRB, 330 F.2d 683, 685 (3d Cir. 1964), we held that to qualify as concerted activity "it must appear at the very least that [the conduct] was engaged in with the object of initiating or inducing or preparing for group action or that it had some relation to group action in the interest of the employees."

  5. Trustees of Boston University v. N.L.R.B

    548 F.2d 391 (1st Cir. 1977)   Cited 20 times

    No. 76-1331. January 28, 1977. Harold Hestnes, Boston, Mass., with whom John G. Fabiano, Waban, Mass., James L. Quarles, III, Washington, D.C., and Hale Dorr, Boston, Mass., were on brief, for petitioner. John G. Elligers, Atty., Washington, D.C., with whom John S. Irving, Jr., Gen. Counsel, John E. Higgins, Jr., Deputy Gen. Counsel, Carl L. Taylor, Associate Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, Aileen Armstrong, and Woody N. Peterson, Attys., Washington, D.C., were on brief

  6. N.L.R.B. v. M B Headwear Co.

    349 F.2d 170 (4th Cir. 1965)   Cited 22 times
    Stating that a "substantial evidence" challenge presented a "familiar question"