Professional Medical Transport, Inc.

7 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Katz
369 U.S. 736 (1962) Cited 712 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. Weingarten, Inc.
420 U.S. 251 (1975) Cited 434 times 64 Legal Analyses
Holding that an employer commits an unfair labor practice by compelling an employee to attend an investigatory meeting that could lead to discipline without allowing the employee to bring a union witness
Detroit Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
440 U.S. 301 (1979) Cited 228 times 20 Legal Analyses
Holding 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 Analyses
Approving "discovery-type standard"
Local Union No. 189, Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen v. Jewel Tea Co.
381 U.S. 676 (1965) Cited 243 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding a marketing hours limitation contained in a multiemployer contract exempt from antitrust liability because its purpose was to protect the wages, hours, and working conditions of the union's members
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
Jackson Hosp. Corp. v. N.L.R.B
647 F.3d 1137 (D.C. Cir. 2011) Cited 6 times
Explaining that “[l]ong ago” the NLRB “clarified” that an employee has no right to bring a witness to a meeting, the “sole purpose” of which is to deliver a predetermined warning

Professional Medical Transport, Inc.

7 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Katz

Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. Weingarten, Inc.

Holding that an employer commits an unfair labor practice by compelling an employee to attend an investigatory meeting that could lead to discipline without allowing the employee to bring a union witness

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

Holding 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.

Approving "discovery-type standard"

Local Union No. 189, Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Workmen v. Jewel Tea Co.

Finding a marketing hours limitation contained in a multiemployer contract exempt from antitrust liability because its purpose was to protect the wages, hours, and working conditions of the union's members

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

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

Jackson Hosp. Corp. v. N.L.R.B

Explaining that “[l]ong ago” the NLRB “clarified” that an employee has no right to bring a witness to a meeting, the “sole purpose” of which is to deliver a predetermined warning