§
Zurn/N.E.P.C.O.

21 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. H. Rutter-Rex Manufacturing Co.

    396 U.S. 258 (1969)   Cited 184 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."

  2. Romano v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith

    487 U.S. 1205 (1988)   Cited 106 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption

  3. 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

  4. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. FES

    301 F.3d 83 (3d Cir. 2002)   Cited 50 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Holding issue not exhausted where the "tenor" of petitioner's objection to the Board was "purely factual," but the tenor of the objection on appeal was legal

  5. Fluor Daniel, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    332 F.3d 961 (6th Cir. 2003)   Cited 15 times
    In Fluor Daniel, the Board apparently calculated the number of deviations from the hiring policy at issue by counting the number of deviations from all hiring protocols for each applicant.

  6. Contractors' Labor Pool, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    323 F.3d 1051 (D.C. Cir. 2003)   Cited 14 times
    Concluding that the word "inherently" precludes reliance on "independent variables"

  7. Intern. Union of Operating Eng'rs v. N.L.R.B

    325 F.3d 818 (7th Cir. 2003)   Cited 12 times

    No. 02-1044. Argued September 27, 2002. Decided March 28, 2003. Petition for review of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). Brian C. Hlavin (Argued), Baum, Sigman, Auerbach, Pierson Neuman, Chicago, IL, for Petitioner. Elizabeth Kinney, National Labor Relations Board, Region 13, Chicago, IL, David Seid (Argued), National Labor Relations Board, Appellate Court, Enforcement Litigation, Washington, DC, Will J. Vance, National Labor Relations Board, Region 33, Peoria, IL, for Respondent. Michael E

  8. Alexander Dawson, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    586 F.2d 1300 (9th Cir. 1978)   Cited 40 times
    Holding "the content of a document, when considered with the circumstances surrounding its discovery, is an adequate basis for [its authentication]"

  9. Prill v. N.L.R.B

    835 F.2d 1481 (D.C. Cir. 1987)   Cited 27 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that an employee takes concerted action “when he acts with the actual participation or on the authority of his co-workers”

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Donkin's Inn, Inc.

    532 F.2d 138 (9th Cir. 1976)   Cited 41 times

    No. 74-3252. March 4, 1976. Rehearing Denied April 28, 1976. Edmund Cooke, Atty. (argued), NLRB, Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Robert S. Rose (argued), of Harris Aranda, Marina Del Rey, Cal., for respondent. Before CHAMBERS, TRASK and WALLACE, Circuit Judges. OPINION TRASK, Circuit Judge: This is an application for Enforcement of an Order of the NLRB, issued on October 9, 1974, against Donkin's Inn, Inc. (hereafter, "the Company") for certain violations of sections 8(a)(5) and 8(a)(1) of the

  11. Section 152 - Definitions

    29 U.S.C. § 152   Cited 3,214 times   27 Legal Analyses
    Defining a supervisor to include “any individual having authority . . . to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign, reward, or discipline other employees, or responsibly to direct them, or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action, if in connection with the foregoing the exercise of such authority is not of a merely routine or clerical nature, but requires the use of independent judgment”