§

IATSE, Local 720, AFL-CIO, CLC (Tropicana Las Vegas, Inc.)

363 NLRB No. 148 (N.L.R.B. 2016)
IATSE, Local 720, AFL-CIO, CLC (Tropicana Las Vegas, Inc.)

7 Cited authorities

  1. Vaca v. Sipes

    386 U.S. 171 (1967)   Cited 4,204 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, under the LMRA, an "individual employee has absolute right to have his grievance taken to arbitration regardless of the provisions of the applicable collective bargaining agreement"

  2. N. A. A. C. P. v. Alabama

    357 U.S. 449 (1958)   Cited 1,969 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[c]ompelled disclosure of membership in an organization engaged in advocacy of particular beliefs" may violate the First Amendment

  3. Breininger v. Sheet Metal Workers

    493 U.S. 67 (1989)   Cited 300 times
    Holding that failure of union to refer plaintiff for employment was not cognizable under the LMRDA because it did not involve "discipline"

  4. Detroit Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    440 U.S. 301 (1979)   Cited 225 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that NLRB erred in requiring employer to disclose performance test scores of employees as information for collective bargaining, regardless of employee consent, because of the sensitive nature of the test scores

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Acme Industrial Co.

    385 U.S. 432 (1967)   Cited 263 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Approving "discovery-type standard"

  6. Jacoby v. N.L.R.B

    233 F.3d 611 (D.C. Cir. 2000)   Cited 5 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Jacoby, the D.C. Circuit reiterated the reasoning it articulated in Plumbers Pipe Fitters in holding that the duty of fair representation also precludes departures from established exclusive hiring hall procedures and that the Board had articulated an erroneous view of the law in concluding that the duty of fair representation did not apply when such departures were caused by union negligence. 233 F.3d at 616-17.

  7. Section 552 - Public information; agency rules, opinions, orders, records, and proceedings

    5 U.S.C. § 552   Cited 12,361 times   558 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Court's entering of a “Stipulation and Order” approving the parties' terms of dismissal did not amount to a “court-ordered consent decree” that would render the plaintiff the prevailing party