All State & Fed.
JX
Search the Law
Search
§
Help
Sign In
Back to
Results
Road & Rail Services
348 N.L.R.B. 1160 (N.L.R.B. 2006)
Copy Cite
Read
Read
Attorney Analyses
Analyses
Citing Briefs
Briefs
Citing Cases
Citing Cases
Cited Authorities
Cited Authorities
7
Road & Rail Services
7
Cited authorities
Fall River Dyeing & Finishing Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
482 U.S. 27 (1987)
Cited 369 times
12 Legal Analyses
Holding that the new employer must bargain with the old union, if the new employer is a true successor, and discussing factors
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Burns International Security Services, Inc.
406 U.S. 272 (1972)
Cited 478 times
49 Legal Analyses
Holding that a successor is not bound to substantive terms of previous collective bargaining agreement
Garment Workers v. Labor Board
366 U.S. 731 (1961)
Cited 213 times
4 Legal Analyses
Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support
Auciello Iron Works, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
517 U.S. 781 (1996)
Cited 59 times
5 Legal Analyses
Holding that NLRB is due "considerable deference . . . by virtue of its charge to develop national labor policy"
Canteen Corp. v. N.L.R.B
103 F.3d 1355 (7th Cir. 1997)
Cited 18 times
Affirming NLRB's finding of substantial continuity where there was no temporal break in the operation of the two businesses
Intern. Ass'n of Machinists, Etc. v. N.L.R.B
595 F.2d 664 (D.C. Cir. 1978)
Cited 14 times
Approving the Board's reasoning in Spruce Up
Spitzer Akron, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
540 F.2d 841 (6th Cir. 1976)
Cited 6 times
In Spitzer, this Court noted that the Second Circuit, in defining the perfectly clear successor exception, relied on the NLRB's decision in Spruce Up Corp., 209 NLRB No. 19 (1974).