§

Specialty Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center of Mobile

357 N.L.R.B. 934 (N.L.R.B. 2011)
Specialty Healthcare and Rehabilitation Center of Mobile

30 Cited authorities

  1. Roberts v. United States Jaycees

    468 U.S. 609 (1984)   Cited 2,048 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that infringement of the right to associate "may be justified by regulations adopted to serve compelling state interests, unrelated to the suppression of ideas, that cannot be achieved through means significantly less restrictive of associational freedoms"

  2. Chemical Workers v. Pittsburgh Glass

    404 U.S. 157 (1971)   Cited 630 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding retirees are not "employees" within the bargaining unit

  3. Ohio Pub. Employees Retirement System v. Betts

    492 U.S. 158 (1989)   Cited 231 times
    Holding that the ADEA applies only to hiring, firing, wages, salaries, and "other non-fringe-benefit terms and conditions of employment"

  4. Thomas v. Collins

    323 U.S. 516 (1945)   Cited 886 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a state may regulate labor unions but "[s]uch regulation ... must not trespass upon the domain set apart for ... free assembly"

  5. Board v. Hearst Publications

    322 U.S. 111 (1944)   Cited 791 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Determining whether newsboys were independent contractors or employees under the National Labor Relations Act ("NLRA")

  6. American Hospital Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    499 U.S. 606 (1991)   Cited 167 times
    Holding that statements in committee reports were not binding on the agency and do not "ha[ve] the force of law, for the Constitution is quite explicit about the procedure that Congress must follow in legislating"

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Yeshiva University

    444 U.S. 672 (1980)   Cited 183 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that all faculty members are managers for purposes of federal labor law even though they lack any legal instruments of control

  8. Packard Co. v. Labor Board

    330 U.S. 485 (1947)   Cited 382 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that Board determinations of unit issues involves a "large measure of informed discretion."

  9. Labor Board v. Metropolitan Ins. Co.

    380 U.S. 438 (1965)   Cited 180 times
    In Metropolitan Ins. Co., supra, at 444, we made it clear that "`courts may not accept appellate counsel's post hoc rationalizations for agency action.'"

  10. Pittsburgh Glass Co. v. Board

    313 U.S. 146 (1941)   Cited 294 times
    In Pittsburgh Glass, the Court held that it was not a denial of due process for the Board to refuse to consider evidence relating to the certification issue when petitioner first sought to introduce such evidence at the unfair labor practice hearing.

  11. Section 158 - Unfair labor practices

    29 U.S.C. § 158   Cited 10,317 times   84 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355

  12. Section 159 - Representatives and elections

    29 U.S.C. § 159   Cited 2,441 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Granting a bargaining unit the exclusive right to represent employees in it

  13. Section 483.75 - Quality assurance and performance improvement

    42 C.F.R. § 483.75   Cited 70 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Governing facility administration

  14. Section 103.30 - Appropriate bargaining units in the health care industry

    29 C.F.R. § 103.30   Cited 13 times   5 Legal Analyses

    (a) This portion of the rule shall be applicable to acute care hospitals, as defined in paragraph (f) of this section: Except in extraordinary circumstances and in circumstances in which there are existing non-conforming units, the following shall be appropriate units, and the only appropriate units, for petitions filed pursuant to section 9(c)(1)(A)(i) or 9(c)(1)(B) of the National Labor Relations Act, as amended, except that, if sought by labor organizations, various combinations of units may also