§

Aroostook County Regional Ophthalmology Center

317 N.L.R.B. 218 (N.L.R.B. 1995)
Aroostook County Regional Ophthalmology Center

9 Cited authorities

  1. Garner v. Teamsters Union

    346 U.S. 485 (1953)   Cited 690 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Garner the emphasis was not on two conflicting labor statutes but rather on two similar remedies, one state and one federal, brought to bear on precisely the same conduct.

  2. Beth Israel Hospital v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    437 U.S. 483 (1978)   Cited 220 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that, in the context of solicitation rules, such circumstances are required to justify restrictions on solicitation during nonworking time

  3. Romano v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner Smith

    487 U.S. 1205 (1988)   Cited 105 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption

  4. N.L.R.B. v. Wright Line, a Div. of Wright Line, Inc.

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 357 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Baptist Hospital, Inc.

    442 U.S. 773 (1979)   Cited 71 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Upholding solicitation ban in corridors and sitting rooms

  6. Prill v. N.L.R.B

    755 F.2d 941 (D.C. Cir. 1985)   Cited 80 times   3 Legal Analyses
    In Prill v. NLRB, 755 F.2d 941, 948 (D.C. Cir. 1985), the D.C. Circuit remanded a case to the agency because "a regulation [was] based on an incorrect view of applicable law."

  7. 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”

  8. Mushroom Transportation Company v. N.L.R.B

    330 F.2d 683 (3d Cir. 1964)   Cited 48 times
    In Mushroom Transportation Co. v. NLRB, 330 F.2d 683, 685 (3d Cir. 1964), we held that to qualify as concerted activity "it must appear at the very least that [the conduct] was engaged in with the object of initiating or inducing or preparing for group action or that it had some relation to group action in the interest of the employees."

  9. Jeannette Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    532 F.2d 916 (3d Cir. 1976)   Cited 25 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Sustaining the Board's finding that the employer's rule broadly prohibiting wage discussions was an unfair labor practice under § 8, reasoning that "wage discussions can be protected activity and that an employer's unqualified rule barring such discussions has the tendency to inhibit such activity"