HCR Manor Care Easton

31 Cited authorities

  1. Universal Camera Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    340 U.S. 474 (1951)   Cited 9,669 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that court may not "displace the Board's choice between two fairly conflicting views, even though the court would justifiably have made a different choice had the matter been before it de novo "
  2. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Robbins Tire & Rubber Co.

    437 U.S. 214 (1978)   Cited 963 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a FOIA requestor's rights are neither “diminished” nor “enhanced” in light of a “particular, litigation-generated need for these materials”
  3. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Transportation Management Corp.

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 652 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."
  4. Eastex, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    437 U.S. 556 (1978)   Cited 196 times   13 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a newsletter that "urg[ed] employees to write their legislators to oppose incorporation of the state 'right-to-work' statute into a revised state constitution," "criticiz[ed] a Presidential veto of an increase in the federal minimum wage and urg[ed] employees to register to vote" was protected concerted activity
  5. Deere Co. v. Kinzenbaw

    470 U.S. 1004 (1985)   Cited 149 times

    No. 84-975. February 25, 1985, OCTOBER TERM 1984. C.A. Fed. Cir. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 741 F. 2d 383.

  6. Labor Board v. Parts Co.

    375 U.S. 405 (1964)   Cited 213 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Act “prohibits not only intrusive threats and promises but also conduct immediately favorable to employees which is undertaken with the express purpose of impinging upon their freedom of choice for or against unionization and is reasonably calculated to have that effect.”
  7. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
  8. Labor Board v. Burnup Sims

    379 U.S. 21 (1964)   Cited 106 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"
  9. 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"
  10. Perdue Farms, Inc. v. Nat. Lbr. Relations Bd.

    144 F.3d 830 (D.C. Cir. 1998)   Cited 28 times
    Deferring to agency's resolution of contradictory evidence
  11. Rule 801 - Definitions That Apply to This Article; Exclusions from Hearsay

    Fed. R. Evid. 801   Cited 19,556 times   77 Legal Analyses
    Holding that such a statement must merely be made by the party and offered against that party
  12. Section 158 - Unfair labor practices

    29 U.S.C. § 158   Cited 10,313 times   84 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355
  13. Section 157 - Right of employees as to organization, collective bargaining, etc.

    29 U.S.C. § 157   Cited 3,300 times   97 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees the right to engage in or refrain from engaging in union activity
  14. Section 201.29 - Resident rights

    28 Pa. Code § 201.29   Cited 4 times

    (a) The governing body of the facility shall establish written policies regarding the rights and responsibilities of residents as provided for in 42 CFR 483.10 (relating to resident rights) and this section. Through the administrator, the governing body shall be responsible for development of and adherence to procedures implementing the policies. The written policies shall include a mechanism for the inclusion of residents, or a resident representative, in the development, implementation and review