§

DROCK Gaming, LLC d/b/a The D Casino

28-CA-219756 (N.L.R.B. Oct. 29, 2019)
DROCK Gaming, LLC d/b/a The D Casino

14 Cited authorities

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

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 656 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. City Disposal Systems, Inc.

    465 U.S. 822 (1984)   Cited 206 times   9 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a "lone employee's invocation of a right grounded in his collective-bargaining agreement is . . . a concerted activity in a very real sense" because the employee is in effect reminding his employer of the power of the group that brought about the agreement and that could be reharnessed if the employer refuses to respect the employee's objection

  3. Zimomra v. Alamo Rent-A-Car

    522 U.S. 948 (1997)   Cited 104 times
    Holding that active supervision unnecessary where challenged ordinance left defendants, car rental companies at Denver International Airport, virtually no discretionary authority in setting and collecting usage fees from their customers because usage fee determined by detailed formula

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

    487 U.S. 1205 (1988)   Cited 106 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Upholding conclusion that employees classified as department managers did not meet executive exemption

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

    662 F.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981)   Cited 358 times   46 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "but for" test applied in a "mixed motive" case under the National Labor Relations Act

  6. Dreis Krump Mfg. Co., Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    544 F.2d 320 (7th Cir. 1976)   Cited 48 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding Board's refusal to defer on ground that award would violate employee's § 7 rights.

  7. New Breed Leasing Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    111 F.3d 1460 (9th Cir. 1997)   Cited 17 times
    Holding that an ALJ's credibility determinations will be upheld by the court “unless they are ‘inherently incredible or patently unreasonable’ ”

  8. 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”

  9. Anheuser-Busch, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    338 F.3d 267 (4th Cir. 2003)   Cited 9 times
    Noting that "an employee . . . can lose protections if his conduct is so egregious as to take it outside the protection of the Act, or of such a character as to render the employee unfit for further service"

  10. Palace Sports Entm't, Inc. v. NLRB

    411 F.3d 212 (D.C. Cir. 2005)   Cited 6 times

    No. 04-1261, 04-1276. Argued March 18, 2005. Decided May 31, 2005. On Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Robert M. Vercruysse argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs was Gary S. Fealk. David A. Fleischer, Senior Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Arthur F. Rosenfeld, General Counsel, John H. Ferguson, Assistant General Counsel, Aileen A. Armstrong

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

    29 U.S.C. § 157   Cited 3,311 times   97 Legal Analyses
    Granting "employees" the right to unionize