§

Arbor Recycling and Arbor Lite Logistics, A Singler Employer

02-CA-180470 (N.L.R.B. Mar. 26, 2018)
Arbor Recycling and Arbor Lite Logistics, A Singler Employer

14 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 651 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the employer bears the burden of negating causation in a mixed-motive discrimination case, noting "[i]t is fair that [the employer] bear the risk that the influence of legal and illegal motives cannot be separated."

  2. Labor Board v. Walton Mfg. Co.

    369 U.S. 404 (1962)   Cited 298 times
    Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"

  3. W.F. Bolin Co. v. N.L.R.B

    70 F.3d 863 (6th Cir. 1995)   Cited 48 times
    Holding that an "inference of improper employer motivation" is permitted when an employer has terminated an employee who acted as a leader in making complaints to management on behalf of himself or others, or has organized workers on employment issues

  4. Multi-Ad Services, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    255 F.3d 363 (7th Cir. 2001)   Cited 33 times
    Affirming Board's finding of coercive interrogation where an employee was asked "why he would want to bring a union into the company"

  5. Bourne v. N.L.R.B

    332 F.2d 47 (2d Cir. 1964)   Cited 93 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Bourne, we held that interrogation which does not contain express threats is not an unfair labor practice unless certain "fairly severe standards" are met showing that the very fact of interrogation was coercive.

  6. Torbitt Castleman v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    123 F.3d 899 (6th Cir. 1997)   Cited 16 times
    Stating that an employee's subjective reaction does not render the challenged conduct unlawful

  7. Vance v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    71 F.3d 486 (4th Cir. 1995)   Cited 17 times
    Finding a single employer where interrelation of operations, common ownership, or centralized control of labor relations are present

  8. Hotel Emp. Restaurant Emp. Un. v. N.L.R.B

    760 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1985)   Cited 26 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176

  9. Adair Standish Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    912 F.2d 854 (6th Cir. 1990)   Cited 17 times
    Holding that the employer violated the Act by instituting changes in the employees' schedules following the union's certification

  10. Mid-Mountain Foods, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    269 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 2001)   Cited 1 times

    No. 00-1422. Argued October 9, 2001. Decided November 6, 2001. On Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Ronald I. Tisch argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs were Peter A. Susser and Mark M. Lawson. Anna L. Francis, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Arthur F. Rosenfeld, General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Associate General Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong