51 Cited authorities

  1. San Diego Unions v. Garmon

    359 U.S. 236 (1959)   Cited 2,405 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "the States as well as the federal court must defer to the exclusive competence of the National Labor Relations Board" if "an activity is arguably subject to § 7 or § 8 of the [NLRA]"
  2. Steele v. L. N.R. Co.

    323 U.S. 192 (1944)   Cited 930 times
    Holding that a labor organization must represent all members of a "craft or class of employees . . . regardless of their union affiliations or want of them"
  3. Labor Board v. American Ins. Co.

    343 U.S. 395 (1952)   Cited 265 times
    Determining that negotiation of labor contract had not rendered case moot
  4. Auciello Iron Works, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    517 U.S. 781 (1996)   Cited 55 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that NLRB is due "considerable deference . . . by virtue of its charge to develop national labor policy"
  5. Marina Point, Ltd. v. Wolfson

    30 Cal.3d 721 (Cal. 1982)   Cited 199 times
    Holding that apartment complex could not, under the Unruh Act, prohibit families with children
  6. Agricultural Labor Relations Bd. v. Superior Court

    16 Cal.3d 392 (Cal. 1976)   Cited 172 times
    In Agricultural Labor Relations Bd. v. Superior Court, supra, 16 Cal.3d 392, however, we upheld an ALRB rule providing limited access by union organizers to workers in the fields, despite the fact that under the NLRA access by union organizers to workers in working areas is determined on a case-by-case basis, upon a showing that the particular workers are otherwise inaccessible.
  7. Rojas v. Superior Court

    33 Cal.4th 407 (Cal. 2004)   Cited 61 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding California mediation privilege was not subject to “good cause” exception because only exceptions to mediation confidentiality were those expressly provided in statute
  8. Tex-Cal Land Management v. Agricultural Labor Rel. Bd.

    24 Cal.3d 335 (Cal. 1979)   Cited 87 times
    In Tex-Cal Land Management, Inc. we held that the Legislature could properly provide for substantial evidence review of a statewide agency "whether or not the California Constitution provides for that agency's exercising `judicial power.'"
  9. Pacific Legal Foundation v. Unemployment Ins. App. Bd.

    29 Cal.3d 101 (Cal. 1981)   Cited 73 times
    In Pacific Legal Foundation, supra, 29 Cal.3d 101, 109, our Supreme Court set forth the procedures to be applied when an appellate court must assess the validity of a precedent benefit or tax decision under section 409.2. "Precedent decisions are akin to agency rulemaking and, therefore, judicial recourse is available under section 409.2 to persons affected by the precedent similar to recourse generally available against regulations. [Citation.] Since the board's precedent decisions simply interpret controlling statutes and regulations, their correctness as precedent relates to law and policy rather than to factual resolutions."
  10. J.R. Norton Co. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Bd.

    26 Cal.3d 1 (Cal. 1979)   Cited 73 times
    In J. R. Norton, we held that that the Board cannot award make-whole relief as a per se remedy for technical refusals to bargain.
  11. Section 1153

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1153   Cited 48 times

    It shall be an unfair labor practice for an agricultural employer to do any of the following: (a) To interfere with, restrain, or coerce agricultural employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 1152. (b) To dominate or interfere with the formation or administration of any labor organization or contribute financial or other support to it. However, subject to such rules and regulations as may be made and published by the board pursuant to Section 1144, an agricultural employer shall

  12. Section 1156.3

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1156.3   Cited 20 times

    (a) A petition that is either signed by, or accompanied by authorization cards signed by, a majority of the currently employed employees in the bargaining unit may be filed by an agricultural employee or group of agricultural employees, or any individual or labor organization acting on behalf of those agricultural employees, in accordance with any rules and regulations prescribed by the board. The petition shall allege all of the following: (1) That the number of agricultural employees currently

  13. Section 1164

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1164   Cited 7 times

    (a) An agricultural employer or a labor organization certified as the exclusive bargaining agent of a bargaining unit of agricultural employees may file with the board, at any time following (1) 90 days after a renewed demand to bargain by an agricultural employer or a labor organization certified prior to January 1, 2003, which meets the conditions specified in Section 1164.11, (2) 90 days after an initial request to bargain by an agricultural employer or a labor organization certified after January

  14. Section 1154

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1154   Cited 6 times

    It shall be an unfair labor practice for a labor organization or its agents to do any of the following: (a) To restrain or coerce: (1) Agricultural employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in Section 1152. This paragraph shall not impair the right of a labor organization to prescribe its own rules with respect to the acquisition or retention of membership therein. (2) An agricultural employer in the selection of his representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining or the adjustment

  15. Section 1142

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1142   Cited 4 times

    (a) The principal office of the board shall be in Sacramento, but it may meet and exercise any or all of its power at any other place in California. (b) Besides the principal office in Sacramento, as provided in subdivision (a), the board may establish offices in such other cities as it shall deem necessary. The board may delegate to the personnel of these offices such powers as it deems appropriate to determine the unit appropriate for the purpose of collective bargaining, to investigate and provide

  16. Section 1164.11

    Cal. Lab. Code § 1164.11

    A demand made pursuant to paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 1164 may be made only in cases which meet all of the following criteria: (a) the parties have failed to reach agreement for at least one year after the date on which the labor organization made its initial request to bargain, (b) the employer has committed an unfair labor practice, and (c) the parties have not previously had a binding contract between them. Ca. Lab. Code § 1164.11 Added by Stats 2002 ch 1145 (SB 1156), s 2, eff

  17. Section 3395 - Heat Illness Prevention in Outdoor Places of Employment

    Cal. Code Regs. tit. 8 § 3395   Cited 6 times   14 Legal Analyses

    (a) Title, Scope, and Application. (1) This section shall be known and may be cited as the Maria Isabel Vasquez Jimenez heat illness standard, and shall apply to all outdoor places of employment. EXCEPTION: If an industry is not listed in subsection (a)(2), employers in that industry are not required to comply with subsection (e), High-heat procedures. (2) List of industries subject to all provisions of this standard, including subsection (e): (A) Agriculture (B) Construction (C) Landscaping (D)

  18. Rule 8.520 - Briefs by parties and amici curiae; judicial notice

    Cal. R. 8.520   Cited 362 times

    (a)Parties' briefs; time to file (1) Within 30 days after the Supreme Court files the order of review, the petitioner must serve and file in that court either an opening brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (2) Within 30 days after the petitioner files its brief or the time to do so expires, the opposing party must serve and file either an answer brief on the merits or the brief it filed in the Court of Appeal. (3) The petitioner may file a reply brief on the merits or

  19. Rule 8.504 - Form and contents of petition, answer, and reply

    Cal. R. 8.504   Cited 13 times

    (a)In general Except as provided in this rule, a petition for review, answer, and reply must comply with the relevant provisions of rule 8.204. (Subd (a) amended effective January 1, 2007.) (b) Contents of a petition (1) The body of the petition must begin with a concise, nonargumentative statement of the issues presented for review, framing them in terms of the facts of the case but without unnecessary detail. (2) The petition must explain how the case presents a ground for review under rule 8.500(b)