138 S. Ct. 1612 (2018) Cited 967 times 169 Legal Analyses
Holding that, under Concepcion , "courts may not allow a contract defense to reshape traditional individualized arbitration" and "a rule seeking to declare individualized arbitration proceedings off limits" is preempted by the FAA
532 U.S. 105 (2001) Cited 1,594 times 52 Legal Analyses
Holding that the phrase "any other class of workers engaged in ... commerce," following the specific examples of seamen and railroad employees, includes only "transportation workers," because construing it to include all other workers "fails to give independent effect to the statute’s enumeration of the specific categories of workers" that precede it
502 U.S. 527 (1992) Cited 156 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that Board erred in finding that employer should have allowed union on its premises because it had no other way to reach its target audience, inasmuch as in reaching its decision the Board misconstrued prior Supreme Court precedent
In Amalgamated Workers v. Edison Co., 309 U.S. 261, we held that the Board had implied authority to institute contempt proceedings for violation of court decrees enforcing orders of the Board.
Upholding its earlier holding in D.R. Horton, Inc. v. NLRB , 737 F.3d 344 (5th Cir. 2013), that arbitration provisions mandating individual arbitration of employment-related claims do not violate the NLRA and are enforceable under the FAA
Holding that contractual provision allowing employer to adopt or change policies during course of agreement permitted employer to unilaterally change on-call policy