United States Postal Service

26 Cited authorities

Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
340 U.S. 474 (1951) Cited 9,697 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 "
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Canning
573 U.S. 513 (2014) Cited 280 times 150 Legal Analyses
Holding that because there was no quorum of validly appointed board members, the NLRB “lacked authority to act,” and the enforcement order was therefore “void ab initio ”
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Curtin Matheson Scientific, Inc.
494 U.S. 775 (1990) Cited 177 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that Board has "considerable deference" in determining the legal rule to apply and should be upheld "as long as it is rational and consistent with the Act"
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
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.
385 U.S. 432 (1967) Cited 265 times 4 Legal Analyses
Approving "discovery-type standard"
H. K. Porter Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
397 U.S. 99 (1970) Cited 222 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the NLRB is "without power to compel a company or a union to agree to any substantive contractual provision of a collective-bargaining agreement."
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. H. Rutter-Rex Manufacturing Co.
396 U.S. 258 (1969) Cited 185 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."
Labor Board v. Truitt Mfg. Co.
351 U.S. 149 (1956) Cited 223 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that the duty to produce information relevant to a bargaining issue is derivative from the broader statutory duty to bargain in good-faith
United States v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp.
638 F.2d 570 (3d Cir. 1980) Cited 328 times
Holding that an individual's privacy interest is not absolute and, therefore, can be curtailed by some governmental interests
Soule Glass and Glazing Co. v. N.L.R.B
652 F.2d 1055 (1st Cir. 1981) Cited 97 times
Holding that the employer "must bargain with respect to the decision to remove work from bargaining unit employees, not merely its effects on the employees"
Rule 35 - Physical and Mental Examinations
Fed. R. Civ. P. 35 Cited 2,502 times 6 Legal Analyses
Providing no cost-shifting mechanisms

United States Postal Service

26 Cited authorities

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 because there was no quorum of validly appointed board members, the NLRB “lacked authority to act,” and the enforcement order was therefore “void ab initio ”

Holding that Board has "considerable deference" in determining the legal rule to apply and should be upheld "as long as it is rational and consistent with the Act"

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

Approving "discovery-type standard"

Holding that the NLRB is "without power to compel a company or a union to agree to any substantive contractual provision of a collective-bargaining agreement."

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."

Holding that the duty to produce information relevant to a bargaining issue is derivative from the broader statutory duty to bargain in good-faith

Holding that an individual's privacy interest is not absolute and, therefore, can be curtailed by some governmental interests

Holding that the employer "must bargain with respect to the decision to remove work from bargaining unit employees, not merely its effects on the employees"

Providing no cost-shifting mechanisms