ยง

Scott Lee Guttering Co.

295 N.L.R.B. 497 (N.L.R.B. 1989)
Scott Lee Guttering Co.

7 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. City Disposal Systems, Inc.

    465 U.S. 822 (1984)   Cited 206 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "lone employee's invocation of a right grounded in his collective-bargaining agreement is . . . a concerted activity in a very real sense" because the employee is in effect reminding his employer of the power of the group that brought about the agreement and that could be reharnessed if the employer refuses to respect the employee's objection

  3. 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

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Dorothy Shamrock Coal Co.

    833 F.2d 1263 (7th Cir. 1987)   Cited 34 times
    Stating that "comments demonstrate a `manifest hostility' toward union activity . . . are relevant in determining the Company's motive for its conduct"

  5. 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

  6. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. BASF Wyandotte Corp.

    798 F.2d 849 (5th Cir. 1986)   Cited 25 times
    Finding that a collective bargaining agreement granting employees certain benefits under the plan while they were on "union leaves" of absence from the employer fell within the ยง 186(c) exception

  7. National Labor Relations Bd. v. Ford Brothers

    786 F.2d 232 (6th Cir. 1986)   Cited 2 times

    No. 85-5248. Argued February 3, 1986. Decided March 19, 1986. Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., Frances O'Connell and Howard Perlstein, Robert Hall (argued), Emil C. Farkas, Director, Region 9, N.L.R.B., Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner. William C. Moul (argued), Columbus, Ohio, for respondent. Petition from the National Labor Relations Board. Before MARTIN and KRUPANSKY, Circuit Judges, and CHURCHILL, District Judge. The Honorable James P. Churchill, United