§

Harco Trucking, LLC

32-CA-020621 (N.L.R.B. Jan. 26, 2004)
Harco Trucking, LLC

12 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. Labor Board v. Walton Mfg. Co.

    369 U.S. 404 (1962)   Cited 298 times
    Explaining that the deferential standard of review is appropriate because the "[the ALJ] ... sees the witnesses and hears them testify, while the Board and the reviewing court look only at cold records"

  3. 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

  4. Labor Board v. Burnup Sims

    379 U.S. 21 (1964)   Cited 106 times   21 Legal Analyses
    Finding violation of § 8 "whatever the employer's motive"

  5. Shattuck Denn Mining Corp. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    362 F.2d 466 (9th Cir. 1966)   Cited 56 times
    Upholding Board's determination that discharge for insubordination was pretextual where employer "refused to discharge" another employee also accused of insubordination

  6. J.P. Stevens Co., Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    638 F.2d 676 (4th Cir. 1980)   Cited 15 times
    Recognizing significance of employer's history of § 8 violations

  7. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ferguson

    257 F.2d 88 (5th Cir. 1958)   Cited 38 times

    No. 16973. June 30, 1958. Thomas J. McDermott, Associate Gen. Counsel, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. George E. Seay, Ralph W. Malone, Malone, Lipscomb Seay, Dallas, Tex., for respondent. Before TUTTLE, BROWN and WISDOM, Circuit Judges. JOHN R. BROWN, Circuit Judge. This is a Petition by the Board for enforcement of an Order, 118 N.L.R.B. No. 30, finding the Employer, Shovel Supply Company, guilty of 8(a)(1), 29 U.S.C.A. § 158(a)(1), violations and requiring the reinstatement of four

  8. Time-O-Matic, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    264 F.2d 96 (7th Cir. 1959)   Cited 32 times

    No. 12424. March 5, 1959. Edward B. Miller, Merrill Shepard, Willis S. Ryza, Chicago, Ill., for petitioner, Time-O-Matic, Inc. Pope Ballard, Chicago, Ill., of counsel, for petitioner. Thomas J. McDermott, Associate Gen. Counsel, Frederick U. Reel, Atty., Jerome D. Fenton, Gen. Counsel, Marcel Mallet-Prevost, Asst. Gen. Counsel, Fred S. Landess, Atty., N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for respondent. Before DUFFY, Chief Judge and HASTINGS and PARKINSON, Circuit Judges. HASTINGS, Circuit Judge. Petitioner

  9. Jones McKnight, Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    445 F.2d 97 (7th Cir. 1971)   Cited 8 times
    In Jones McKnight this court found that "[t]he primary purpose of the Act is to further industrial peace, and effectuation of this statutory policy demands that parties to a strike settlement be precluded from going behind their agreement to reopen a matter which they have waived in the interests of peace and harmony."

  10. N.L.R.B. v. John Langenbacher Co.

    398 F.2d 459 (2d Cir. 1968)   Cited 10 times
    In NLRB v. John Langenbacher Co., 398 F.2d 459, 463 (1968), it held that an attempt by employees to enforce their understanding of a collective bargaining agreement is a protected activity "... if the employees have a reasonable basis for believing that their understanding of the terms was the understanding that had been agreed upon...." (emphasis supplied)

  11. Section 151 - Findings and declaration of policy

    29 U.S.C. § 151   Cited 5,099 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Finding that "protection by law of the right of employees to organize and bargain collectively safeguards commerce" and declaring a policy of "encouraging the practice and procedure of collective bargaining"