§

U.S. Dismantlement Corp. And H&H Contractors, Inc.

298 N.L.R.B. 1068 (N.L.R.B. 1990)
U.S. Dismantlement Corp. And H&H Contractors, Inc.

4 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. City Disposal Systems, Inc.

    465 U.S. 822 (1984)   Cited 206 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "lone employee's invocation of a right grounded in his collective-bargaining agreement is . . . a concerted activity in a very real sense" because the employee is in effect reminding his employer of the power of the group that brought about the agreement and that could be reharnessed if the employer refuses to respect the employee's objection

  2. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  3. N.L.R.B. v. Interboro Contractors, Inc.

    388 F.2d 495 (2d Cir. 1967)   Cited 80 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In NLRB v. Interboro Contractors, Inc., 388 F.2d 495, 500 (2d Cir. 1967), the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit stated that the efforts of an individual employee acting alone to enforce the provisions of a collective bargaining agreement may be deemed "concerted," and thus protected, at least when the individual's interpretation of the agreement has a reasonable basis.

  4. Sakrete of Northern Calif., Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    332 F.2d 902 (9th Cir. 1964)   Cited 48 times

    No. 18745. May 21, 1964. Rehearing Denied July 9, 1964. Graydon, Head Ritchey, William A. McKenzie, Leslie A. Meek, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioner. Arnold Orman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Warren M. Davison and Peter M. Giesey, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Leon Ardzrooni, Neyhart Grodin, San Francisco, Cal., on behalf of amicus curiae-Freight, Construction, General Drivers Helpers, Local 287. Before MADDEN