Sikorsky Air Maintenance

15 Cited authorities

Harris v. Forklift Sys., Inc.
510 U.S. 17 (1993) Cited 12,643 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"
Meritor Sav. Bank v. Vinson
477 U.S. 57 (1986) Cited 6,592 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that sexual harassment may be actionable under Title VII as discrimination on the basis of sex if it is sufficiently severe and pervasive
Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,674 times 3 Legal Analyses
Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "
Labor Board v. Katz
369 U.S. 736 (1962) Cited 710 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"
Reeves v. C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc.
594 F.3d 798 (11th Cir. 2010) Cited 455 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding hostile work environment based upon coworkers' frequent use of gender-specific derogatory comments and incident where a coworker displayed a pornographic image of a woman on his computer
Labor Board v. Parts Co.
375 U.S. 405 (1964) Cited 213 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”
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
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.
Perdue Farms, Inc. v. Nat. Lbr. Relations Bd.
144 F.3d 830 (D.C. Cir. 1998) Cited 28 times
Deferring to agency's resolution of contradictory evidence
Adtranz ABB Daimler-Benz Transportation, N.A. v. National Labor Relations
253 F.3d 19 (D.C. Cir. 2001) Cited 20 times 2 Legal Analyses
Finding "derogatory racial or sexual epithets" are not entitled to NLRA protection even when made within the context of union-protected activity

Sikorsky Air Maintenance

15 Cited authorities

Holding that "no single factor is required" to show a hostile work environment, including "whether [the acts are] physically threatening"

Holding that sexual harassment may be actionable under Title VII as discrimination on the basis of sex if it is sufficiently severe and pervasive

Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "

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"

Holding there was a genuine issue of material fact regarding hostile work environment based upon coworkers' frequent use of gender-specific derogatory comments and incident where a coworker displayed a pornographic image of a woman on his computer

Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”

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

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.

Deferring to agency's resolution of contradictory evidence

Finding "derogatory racial or sexual epithets" are not entitled to NLRA protection even when made within the context of union-protected activity