§
Comau, Inc.

8 Cited authorities

  1. Garment Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 731 (1961)   Cited 213 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support

  2. Flying Food Group v. N.L.R.B

    471 F.3d 178 (D.C. Cir. 2006)   Cited 41 times
    Holding that, in administrative proceedings, notice “is sufficient if the [petitioner] understood the issue and was afforded full opportunity to justify its conduct during the course of the litigation”

  3. Vincent Industrial Plastics, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    209 F.3d 727 (D.C. Cir. 2000)   Cited 44 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Vincent Industrial, we directed the Board to premise every bargaining order on an "explicit[ balanc[ing][of] three considerations: (1) the employees' Section 7 rights [ 29 U.S.C. § 157]; (2) whether other purposes of the [NLRA] override the rights of employees to choose their bargaining representatives; and (3) whether alternative remedies are adequate to remedy the violations of the [NLRA]]."

  4. Pleasantview Nursing Home, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    351 F.3d 747 (6th Cir. 2003)   Cited 20 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that oral modification of a collective bargaining agreement was ineffective in the presence of "an express zipper clause prohibiting modification except by written agreement"

  5. Allegheny Ludlum Corporation v. N.L.R.B

    104 F.3d 1354 (D.C. Cir. 1997)   Cited 21 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Allegheny Ludlum, however, we upheld an unfair labor practice violation where the employer warned it would "no longer find ways" to avoid laying off employees if they joined a union.

  6. Comau, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    671 F.3d 1232 (D.C. Cir. 2012)   Cited 4 times
    Explaining some unilateral changes are implemented when the employer announces them, even if those changes do not take effect until a later date

  7. Intern. U. of Petro. Ind. Wkrs. v. N.L.R.B

    980 F.2d 774 (D.C. Cir. 1992)   Cited 16 times

    Nos. 91-1428, 91-1483. Argued October 26, 1992. Decided December 15, 1992. Laurence D. Steinsapir, with whom Henry M. Willis and Susan L. Catler were on the brief, for petitioner in No. 91-1428. James T. Winkler for respondent in No. 91-1483. Margaret E. Luke, Attorney, N.L.R.B., with whom Jerry M. Hunter, Gen. Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, and Linda Dreeben, Supervising Atty., were on the brief, for respondent in No. 91-1428 and petitioner in No. 91-1483. Petition

  8. Columbia Portland Cement Co. v. N.L.R.B

    979 F.2d 460 (6th Cir. 1992)   Cited 12 times
    Holding violations within one year had sufficient temporal proximity