Weyerhaeuser Company

20 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 712 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"
  2. 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
  3. Metropolitan Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    460 U.S. 693 (1983)   Cited 314 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union may, under certain circumstances, waive members' NLRA rights
  4. Piper Aircraft Corp. v. Seven Bar

    466 U.S. 958 (1984)   Cited 182 times
    Discussing HHS' decision to interpret "reasonable volume of services" as requiring a finite measure
  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.

    385 U.S. 432 (1967)   Cited 265 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Approving "discovery-type standard"
  6. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 358 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
  7. 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
  8. Neo Gen Screening, Inc. v. New England Newborn Screening Program

    528 U.S. 1061 (1999)   Cited 34 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 99-617. December 13, 1999. C.A. 1st. Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 187 F. 3d 24.

  9. Labor Board v. Electrical Workers

    346 U.S. 464 (1953)   Cited 125 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Upholding discharge where employees publicly disparaged quality of employer's product, with no discernible relationship to pending labor dispute
  10. Rhone-Poulenc Inc. v. Int'l Ins. Co.

    71 F.3d 1299 (7th Cir. 1995)   Cited 48 times
    Acknowledging the interlocking dependency of liability between an excess and primary insurer, stating that “a suit against an excess insurer cannot proceed in the absence of the primary insurer until the latter ha acknowledged [its] liability to the insured or ha been determined by a court to be liable to him”