§

Austin Fire Equipment, LLC

15-CA-019697 (N.L.R.B. Nov. 29, 2011)
Austin Fire Equipment, LLC

10 Cited authorities

  1. Labor Board v. Katz

    369 U.S. 736 (1962)   Cited 712 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"

  2. Garment Workers v. Labor Board

    366 U.S. 731 (1961)   Cited 213 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union cannot represent a group of employees for which it does not enjoy majority support

  3. International Ass'n of Bridge, Structural & Ornamental Iron Workers, Local 3 v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    843 F.2d 770 (3d Cir. 1988)   Cited 119 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding review of the Board's decision to apply a new rule of law retrospectively is deferential and that the Board's ruling will be disturbed only if it wreaks manifest injustice

  4. Nova Plumbing, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    330 F.3d 531 (D.C. Cir. 2003)   Cited 26 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that contractual language alone cannot establish a § 9 relationship where the union actually lacks majority support

  5. N.L.R.B. v. Triple C Maintenance, Inc.

    219 F.3d 1147 (10th Cir. 2000)   Cited 12 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Describing voluntary recognition under the National Labor Relations Act

  6. American Automatic Sprinkler System, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    163 F.3d 209 (4th Cir. 1998)   Cited 12 times
    Noting that Board incorrectly concluded that the union had attained 9 status because the language in contract did not evidence an unequivocal demand for or grant of voluntary recognition nor a contemporaneous showing of majority support

  7. N.L.R.B. v. Oklahoma Installation Co.

    219 F.3d 1160 (10th Cir. 2000)   Cited 2 times
    Concluding that the contract language at issue did not clearly express the parties' intent, without addressing actual employee support

  8. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ogle Protection Service, Inc.

    444 F.2d 502 (6th Cir. 1971)   Cited 3 times   3 Legal Analyses

    No. 21049. June 30, 1971. Stanley R. Zirkin, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner; Arnold Ordman, Gen. Counsel, Dominick L. Manoli, Associate Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Elliott Moore, Stanley R. Zirkin, Attys., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., on brief. Douglas C. Dahn, Detroit, Mich., for respondents; Tolleson, Burgess Mead, Robert D. Welchli, Detroit, Mich., on brief. Before CELEBREZZE, PECK and McCREE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM. This case is before us a second

  9. Section 158 - Unfair labor practices

    29 U.S.C. § 158   Cited 10,333 times   86 Legal Analyses
    Granting employees a wage increase without bargaining with Local 355

  10. Section 159 - Representatives and elections

    29 U.S.C. § 159   Cited 2,445 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Granting a bargaining unit the exclusive right to represent employees in it