Huber Specialty Hydrates, LLC

11 Cited authorities

Labor Board v. Katz
369 U.S. 736 (1962) Cited 708 times 29 Legal Analyses
Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"
Metropolitan Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
460 U.S. 693 (1983) Cited 309 times 8 Legal Analyses
Holding that a union may, under certain circumstances, waive members' NLRA rights
N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.
662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981) Cited 356 times 46 Legal Analyses
Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act
Nat. Licorice Co. v. Labor Bd.
309 U.S. 350 (1940) Cited 314 times 5 Legal Analyses
Holding that requiring employees to sign individual contracts waiving their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining violates § 8 of the NLRA
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. C & C Plywood Corp.
385 U.S. 421 (1967) Cited 117 times
Holding that the NLRB has the authority to interpret CBAs in the first instance where its interpretation is for the purpose of “enforc[ing] a statutory right which Congress considered necessary to allow labor and management to get on with the process of reaching fair terms and conditions of employment”
N.L.R.B. v. U.S. Postal Service
8 F.3d 832 (D.C. Cir. 1993) Cited 50 times 11 Legal Analyses
Upholding postal service's exercise of contractual right to reduce employees' hours in response to budget reduction
Autonation, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
801 F.3d 767 (7th Cir. 2015) Cited 7 times
Finding employer's claim that it fired employee due to job abandonment to be a pretext because employer knew that employee had filed for unemployment benefits and was under the impression that he had already been terminated and yet the company did nothing to correct the employee's alleged misimpression
Dorsey Trailers, Inc. v. N.L.R.B
233 F.3d 831 (4th Cir. 2000) Cited 21 times
Holding that as long as employer decision requires capital expenditure, decision is outside duty to bargain
N.L.R.B. v. Miller Brewing Company
408 F.2d 12 (9th Cir. 1969) Cited 17 times
No. 22698. February 20, 1969. John D. Burgoyne (argued), Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, David C. Nevins, Washington, D.C., Paul A. Cassady, Director, NLRB, Los Angeles, Cal., for petitioner. Willard Z. Carr, Jr. (argued) of Gibson, Dunn Crutcher, Los Angeles, Cal., for respondent. Before BARNES and ELY, Circuit Judges, and PREGERSON, District Judge. Hon. Harry Pregerson, United States District Judge, Los Angeles
Murphy Diesel Company v. N.L.R.B
454 F.2d 303 (7th Cir. 1971) Cited 14 times
In Murphy Diesel Co. v. NLRB, 454 F.2d 303 (7th Cir. 1971), the court emphasized that the "right to impose work rules and discipline" was not a part of the contract or the negotiations leading to it.

Huber Specialty Hydrates, LLC

11 Cited authorities

Holding that "an employer's unilateral change in conditions of employment under negotiation" is a violation of the National Labor Relations Act because "it is a circumvention of the duty to negotiate"

Holding that a union may, under certain circumstances, waive members' NLRA rights

Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

Holding that requiring employees to sign individual contracts waiving their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining violates § 8 of the NLRA

Upholding postal service's exercise of contractual right to reduce employees' hours in response to budget reduction

Holding that as long as employer decision requires capital expenditure, decision is outside duty to bargain

In Murphy Diesel Co. v. NLRB, 454 F.2d 303 (7th Cir. 1971), the court emphasized that the "right to impose work rules and discipline" was not a part of the contract or the negotiations leading to it.