§

MAINE COAST REGIONAL HEALTH FACLITIES, d/b/a MAINE COAST MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, the sole member of which

369 N.L.R.B. 51 (N.L.R.B. 2020)
MAINE COAST REGIONAL HEALTH FACLITIES, d/b/a MAINE COAST MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, the sole member of which

13 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. Letter Carriers v. Austin

    418 U.S. 264 (1974)   Cited 609 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union newsletter's description of a “scab” as a “traitor” could not be construed as a factual assertion

  3. 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

  4. 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

  5. Labor Board v. Electrical Workers

    346 U.S. 464 (1953)   Cited 125 times   41 Legal Analyses
    Upholding discharge where employees publicly disparaged quality of employer's product, with no discernible relationship to pending labor dispute

  6. King Soopers, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    859 F.3d 23 (D.C. Cir. 2017)   Cited 5 times

    No. 16-1316 C/w 16-1367 06-09-2017 KING SOOPERS, INC., Petitioner v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent Raymond M. Deeny, Colorado Springs, CO, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Jonathon M. Watson, Denver, CO. Amy H. Ginn, Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for respondent. With her on the brief were Richard F. Griffin, Jr., General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Associate General Counsel, Linda Dreeben, Deputy Associate General Counsel, and Robert

  7. Care One at Madison Ave., LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    832 F.3d 351 (D.C. Cir. 2016)   Cited 4 times
    Rejecting similar purported catch-22

  8. Endicott Interconnect Techn. v. N.L.R.B

    453 F.3d 532 (D.C. Cir. 2006)   Cited 8 times
    Finding that Mountain Shadows Golf "accurately reflects the holding in Jefferson Standard "

  9. Prill v. N.L.R.B

    835 F.2d 1481 (D.C. Cir. 1987)   Cited 27 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that an employee takes concerted action “when he acts with the actual participation or on the authority of his co-workers”

  10. Manor Care of Easton, PA., LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    661 F.3d 1139 (D.C. Cir. 2011)

    Nos. 10–1411 11–1011. 2011-11-22 MANOR CARE OF EASTON, PA., LLC, doing business as Manorcare Health Services–Easton, Petitioner v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent.Service Employees International Union Healthcare Pennsylvania (SEIU Healthcare PA), Intervenor. On Petition for Review and Cross–Application for Enforcement of An Order of the National Labor Relations Board.Charles P. Roberts, III argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Clifford H. Nelson Jr. Kellie Isbell