§

International Shipping Agency, Inc. d/b/a INTERSHIP, Marine Terminal Services, Inc. (MTS), and Truck

369 N.L.R.B. 79 (N.L.R.B. 2020)
International Shipping Agency, Inc. d/b/a INTERSHIP, Marine Terminal Services, Inc. (MTS), and Truck

22 Cited authorities

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

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 650 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. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Gissel Packing Co.

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,033 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  3. Fibreboard Corp. v. Labor Board

    379 U.S. 203 (1964)   Cited 729 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "contracting out" of work traditionally performed by bargaining unit employees is a mandatory subject of bargaining under the NLRA

  4. 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"

  5. First National Maintenance Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    452 U.S. 666 (1981)   Cited 267 times   16 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer has no duty to bargain over a decision to shut down part of its business purely for economic reasons

  6. Labor Board v. Borg-Warner Corp.

    356 U.S. 342 (1958)   Cited 296 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding employer's insistence on a ballot clause was an unfair labor practice under § 8 because it was a non-mandatory subject of bargaining and it "substantially modifies the collective-bargaining system provided for in the statute by weakening the independence of the 'representative' chosen by the employees. It enables the employer, in effect, to deal with its employees rather than with their statutory representative."

  7. 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

  8. Textile Workers v. Darlington Co.

    380 U.S. 263 (1965)   Cited 168 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer has the absolute right, at least as far as the NLRA is concerned, to terminate his entire business for any reason

  9. 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

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Joy Recovery Tech

    134 F.3d 1307 (7th Cir. 1998)   Cited 28 times
    Concluding that "[i]n this case, timing is everything," where "[t]he closing of the department comes on the heels of the union's organizational activity," including filing a petition for a representation election

  11. Rule 404 - Character Evidence; Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts.

    Fed. R. Evid. 404   Cited 17,028 times   65 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that even uncharged similar acts can be probative of a defendant's intent and knowledge concerning charged offenses