§
Macy's

20 Cited authorities

  1. American Hospital Ass'n v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    499 U.S. 606 (1991)   Cited 167 times
    Holding that statements in committee reports were not binding on the agency and do not "ha[ve] the force of law, for the Constitution is quite explicit about the procedure that Congress must follow in legislating"

  2. Labor Board v. Metropolitan Ins. Co.

    380 U.S. 438 (1965)   Cited 180 times
    In Metropolitan Ins. Co., supra, at 444, we made it clear that "`courts may not accept appellate counsel's post hoc rationalizations for agency action.'"

  3. Pittsburgh Glass Co. v. Board

    313 U.S. 146 (1941)   Cited 293 times
    In Pittsburgh Glass, the Court held that it was not a denial of due process for the Board to refuse to consider evidence relating to the certification issue when petitioner first sought to introduce such evidence at the unfair labor practice hearing.

  4. Kindred Nursing Centers East, LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    727 F.3d 552 (6th Cir. 2013)   Cited 15 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Enforcing the original Specialty Healthcare case

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Enter. Leasing Co.

    722 F.3d 609 (4th Cir. 2013)   Cited 15 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Finding the “pro forma” recess appointments invalid

  6. Blue Man Vegas v. N.L.R.B

    529 F.3d 417 (D.C. Cir. 2008)   Cited 16 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Explaining the Board's unit-determination cases “generally conform to a consistent analytic framework” in which, to challenge a unit that is “prima facie appropriate”—i.e., a unit in which the employees share a community of interest—the employer must make a heightened showing that the unit is “truly inappropriate”

  7. Serramonte Oldsmobile, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    86 F.3d 227 (D.C. Cir. 1996)   Cited 25 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Concluding impasse was valid where "not a single one of the Union's statements . . . actually committed the Union to a new position or contained any specific proposals"

  8. Trident Seafoods, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    101 F.3d 111 (D.C. Cir. 1996)   Cited 22 times
    Collecting standards

  9. United Food v. N.L.R.B

    519 F.3d 490 (D.C. Cir. 2008)   Cited 10 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Nos. 06-1358, 07-1060, 07-1087. Argued January 23, 2008. Decided March 14, 2008. On Petitions for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. George Wiszynski, argued the cause and filed the briefs for petitioner, United Food and Commercial Workers, AFL-CIO. Steven D. Wheeless, argued the cause for petitioner, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. With him on the briefs was Bennett Evan Cooper. Philip A. Hostak, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued

  10. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Lundy Packing Co.

    68 F.3d 1577 (4th Cir. 1995)   Cited 18 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding N.L.R.B. had improperly excluded quality control workers from manufacturing and production bargaining unit noting N.L.R.B.'s consistent prior findings that such quality control workers "perform a function which is an extension of and integrated with the manufacturing process." (quoting Bennett Industries, Inc., 313 N.L.R.B. No. 254 (June 3, 1994))

  11. Section 157 - Right of employees as to organization, collective bargaining, etc.

    29 U.S.C. § 157   Cited 3,294 times   97 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees the right to engage in or refrain from engaging in union activity

  12. Section 159 - Representatives and elections

    29 U.S.C. § 159   Cited 2,433 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Granting a bargaining unit the exclusive right to represent employees in it

  13. Section 141 - Short title; Congressional declaration of purpose and policy

    29 U.S.C. § 141   Cited 2,055 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Stating Congress' declaration of purpose that "employers, employees, and labor organizations each recognize under law one another's legitimate rights in their relations with each other"