§

Wabeek Country Club

301 N.L.R.B. 694 (N.L.R.B. 1991)
Wabeek Country Club

9 Cited authorities

  1. Carey v. Westinghouse Corp.

    375 U.S. 261 (1964)   Cited 365 times
    Holding that Section 301 gives a federal court jurisdiction over a suit to enforce an arbitration clause in a collective bargaining agreement even if the case is "truly a representation case" that could also be heard by the NLRB under Section 9 of the NLRA

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

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

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. Sierra Pub. Co. v. N.L.R.B

    889 F.2d 210 (9th Cir. 1989)   Cited 23 times
    Discussing N.L.R.B. v. Local Union No. 1229 (Jefferson Standard ), 346 U.S. 464, 74 S.Ct. 172, 98 L.Ed. 195, and its progeny

  6. Golden Day Schools, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    644 F.2d 834 (9th Cir. 1981)   Cited 10 times
    In Golden Day Schools, 644 F.2d 834, the court noted that although the child care workers' leaflet to parents included harsh language and serious charges about the care of the children, it fell "woefully short of the malicious tone" that would justify a discharge under Jefferson Standard. Appellant correctly points out that the court in Golden Day Schools determined that the leaflet played no part in the discharge of the employees.

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Montgomery Ward

    242 F.2d 497 (2d Cir. 1957)   Cited 23 times

    No. 211, Docket 24251. Argued January 11, 1957. Decided March 18, 1957. Theophil C. Kammholtz, Gen. Counsel, Stephen Leonard, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Samuel M. Singer and Florian J. Bartosic, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Charles J. Barnhill and David L. Dickson, Chicago, Ill., and T.W. Madden, New York, N.Y., for respondent. Before CLARK, Chief Judge, and LUMBARD and WATERMAN, Circuit Judges. LUMBARD, Circuit Judge. The National Labor

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Whitin Mach. Works

    217 F.2d 593 (4th Cir. 1954)   Cited 25 times

    No. 6883. November 18, 1954. Decided December 8, 1954. Frederick U. Reel, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C. (George J. Bott, Gen. Counsel, David P. Findling, Assoc. Gen. Counsel, and James A. Ryan, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief), for petitioner. Whiteford S. Blakeney, Charlotte, N.C. (Pierce Blakeney, Charlotte, N.C., on brief), for respondent. Before PARKER, Chief Judge, and SOPER and DOBIE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This is a petition by the National Labor

  9. Section 157 - Right of employees as to organization, collective bargaining, etc.

    29 U.S.C. § 157   Cited 3,302 times   97 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees the right to engage in or refrain from engaging in union activity