§

United States Postal Service

28-CA-019148 (N.L.R.B. Sep. 8, 2004)
United States Postal Service

12 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. Weingarten, Inc.

    420 U.S. 251 (1975)   Cited 434 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer commits an unfair labor practice by compelling an employee to attend an investigatory meeting that could lead to discipline without allowing the employee to bring a union witness

  2. Detroit Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    440 U.S. 301 (1979)   Cited 228 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union's request for employee aptitude tests was relevant to its claim, but employer's interest in preserving confidentiality was also legitimate, and disclosing the information only upon the employee's written consent was a reasonable accommodation

  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.

    385 U.S. 432 (1967)   Cited 265 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Approving "discovery-type standard"

  4. W.F. Bolin Co. v. N.L.R.B

    70 F.3d 863 (6th Cir. 1995)   Cited 48 times
    Holding that an "inference of improper employer motivation" is permitted when an employer has terminated an employee who acted as a leader in making complaints to management on behalf of himself or others, or has organized workers on employment issues

  5. N.L.R.B.v. Talsol Corp.

    155 F.3d 785 (6th Cir. 1998)   Cited 23 times
    Holding that an employee's comments about safety at a group meeting attended by employees and management constituted concerted activity because the meeting was conducted to address plant safety concerns, the employee's questions were on the topic of safety, and the context indicated that the employee's statements were “[c]learly ... not purely personal gripes”

  6. Asarco, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    86 F.3d 1401 (5th Cir. 1996)   Cited 22 times
    Finding of antiunion animus necessary to finding of section 8 violation

  7. Hugh H. Wilson Corporation v. N.L.R.B

    414 F.2d 1345 (3d Cir. 1969)   Cited 37 times
    Finding concerted activity because "[i]n substance, the employees had a gripe. They assembled. They presented their grievance to management. . . ."

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Hicks Oils & Hicksgas, Inc.

    942 F.2d 1140 (7th Cir. 1991)   Cited 3 times

    No. 89-2795. Argued January 14, 1991. Decided September 4, 1991. Barbara A. Atkin, Judith P. Flower, N.L.R.B., Contempt Litigation Branch, Aileen A. Armstrong, William A. Baudler (argued), N.L.R.B., Appellate Court, Enforcement Litigation, Washington, D.C., Joseph H. Solien, N.L.R.B., Region 14, St. Louis, Mo., for petitioner. Gary A. Wincek (argued), William L. Becker, Laner, Muchin, Dombrow, Becker, Levin Tominberg, Chicago, Ill., Nancy M. Watkins, Wilburn, Suggs Watkins, St. Louis, Mo., for respondent

  9. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. N.L.R.B

    667 F.2d 470 (5th Cir. 1982)   Cited 10 times
    Holding that employer did not violate employee's right to union representation at investigatory interview where employer requested that the representative not interfere with questioning because the representative was present at the interview, was allowed time to consult with the employee prior to the interview, and was free to make any additions, suggestions, or clarifications after the interview

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Buitoni Foods Corp.

    298 F.2d 169 (3d Cir. 1962)   Cited 30 times

    No. 13534. Argued October 3, 1961. Decided January 15, 1962. Margaret M. Farmer, Washington, D.C. (Stuart Rothman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Rosanna A. Blake, Atty., National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., on the brief), for petitioner. Joseph S. Oberwager, Newark, N.J., for respondent. Before GOODRICH, STALEY and SMITH, Circuit Judges. SMITH, Circuit Judge. This is a proceeding under Section 10(e) of the Labor Management

  11. Section 1209 - Applicability of Federal labor laws

    39 U.S.C. § 1209   Cited 45 times

    (a) Employee-management relations shall, to the extent not inconsistent with provisions of this title, be subject to the provisions of subchapter II of chapter 7 of title 29. (b) The provisions of chapter 11 of title 29 shall be applicable to labor organizations that have or are seeking to attain recognition under section 1203 of this title, and to such organizations, officers, agents, shop stewards, other representatives, and members to the extent to which such provisions would be applicable if