§

Textile Processors Local 311 (Mission Uniform)

332 N.L.R.B. 1352 (N.L.R.B. 2000)
Textile Processors Local 311 (Mission Uniform)

5 Cited authorities

  1. Zipes v. Trans World Airlines, Inc.

    455 U.S. 385 (1982)   Cited 3,750 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Title VII limitations period should be construed to "honor the remedial purpose of the legislation as a whole without negating the particular purpose of the filing requirement"

  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. H. Rutter-Rex Manufacturing Co.

    396 U.S. 258 (1969)   Cited 184 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the NLRB "is not required to place the consequences of its own delay, even if inordinate, upon wronged employees to the benefit of wrongdoing employers."

  3. Scofield v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    394 U.S. 423 (1969)   Cited 117 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding union rule, enforceable by fines and expulsion, imposing limitation on immediate pay that members could receive for piecework because Court found no "impairment of statutory labor policy"

  4. 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

  5. Laborers Union Local No. 324 v. N.L.R.B

    106 F.3d 918 (9th Cir. 1997)

    Nos. 95-70700, 95-70775 Argued and Submitted January 13, 1997 — San Francisco, California. Decided February 10, 1997 As Amended on Partial Grant of Rehearing August 14, 1997 COUNSEL Sandra Rae Benson, Van Bourg, Weinberg, Roger Rosenfeld, Oakland, California, for petitioner-respondent. Paul Alan Levy, Washington, D.C., for respondent-intervenor. Frederick C. Havard, National Labor Relations Board, Washington D.C., for the National Labor Relations Board. NLRB No. 32-CB-3253. On petition for Review