§

Rosdev Hospitality

22-CA-026794 (N.L.R.B. Jul. 28, 2006)
Rosdev Hospitality

9 Cited authorities

  1. 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

  2. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 711 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"

  3. 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

  4. Metropolitan Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    460 U.S. 693 (1983)   Cited 313 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union may, under certain circumstances, waive members' NLRA rights

  5. Ameristeel Corp. v. Inter. Broth. of Teamsters

    267 F.3d 264 (3d Cir. 2001)   Cited 19 times
    Holding that, because a successor employer cannot be bound against its will by the substantive provisions of its predecessor's CBA, it cannot be compelled to submit to arbitration under the terms of that agreement

  6. 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

  7. Indianapolis Power Light Co. v. N.L.R.B

    898 F.2d 524 (7th Cir. 1990)   Cited 14 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Giving effect to a no-strike clause that had been incorporated from contract to contract for eleven years without change or renegotiation

  8. Pick-Mt. Laurel Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    625 F.2d 476 (3d Cir. 1980)   Cited 7 times
    In Pick-Mt. Laurel, we noted the tension between "`preserving employees' free choice of bargaining representatives, and providing stability for established bargaining relationships."

  9. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ogle Protection Service, Inc.

    444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971)   Cited 3 times   3 Legal Analyses

    No. 21049. June 30, 1971. Stanley R. Zirkin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Stanley R. Zirkin, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Douglas C. Dahn, Detroit, Mich., for respondents; Tolleson, Burgess Mead, Robert D. Welchli, Detroit, Mich., on brief. Before CELEBREZZE, PECK and McCREE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This case is before us a second