§

Hearthside Food Solutions

09-CA-046342 (N.L.R.B. Mar. 1, 2012)
Hearthside Food Solutions

11 Cited authorities

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

    462 U.S. 393 (1983)   Cited 657 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. Gissel Packing Co.

    395 U.S. 575 (1969)   Cited 1,036 times   71 Legal Analyses
    Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

  3. N.L.R.B. v. Consolidated

    301 F. App'x 411 (6th Cir. 2008)   Cited 6 times
    Concluding that substantial evidence supported the NLRB's conclusion that an employer violated § 8 when a security guard told an employee that she could not distribute union literature on company property

  4. Flamingo Hilton-Laughlin v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    148 F.3d 1166 (D.C. Cir. 1998)   Cited 15 times
    Concluding that statements such as "loss to employees was an inevitable consequence of their unionizing" are "partisan, but largely permissible"

  5. DTR Industries, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    297 F. App'x 487 (6th Cir. 2008)   Cited 5 times
    In DTR Indus., Inc. v. N.L.R.B., 297 Fed.Appx. 487, 493 (6th Cir.2008) (hereinafter “DTR II”), the Sixth Circuit compared statements made by the company that it had previously held did fall under the protection of § 158(c) with statements that did not qualify for the protection.

  6. Hotel Emp. Restaurant Emp. Un. v. N.L.R.B

    760 F.2d 1006 (9th Cir. 1985)   Cited 26 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Affirming Rossmore House, 269 NLRB 1176

  7. Dyncorp v. Board

    233 F. App'x 419 (6th Cir. 2007)   Cited 3 times
    Defining a "legitimate reason" to question an employee about a union matter to include reasons "related to a legitimate policy of the employer"

  8. Graham Arch. Products Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    697 F.2d 534 (3d Cir. 1983)   Cited 25 times
    Arguing for judicial review of second-election orders in the certification context

  9. Hancock, Jr., Inc. v. Hancock

    73 F. App'x 617 (4th Cir. 2003)   Cited 1 times

    Nos. 02-2012, 02-2183. Argued May 8, 2003. Decided September 3, 2003. On Petition for Review and Cross-application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. (11-CA-18716). ARGUED: James Francis Edwards, Jr., Edwards, Ballard, Bishop, Sturm, Clark Keim, P.A., Spartanburg, South Carolina, for Hancock. David Arthur Fleischer, Senior Attorney, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D.C., for Board. ON BRIEF: Jeffrey A. Lehrer, Edwards, Ballard, Bishop, Sturm, Clark Keim

  10. N.L.R.B. v. Jakel Motors, Inc.

    875 F.2d 644 (7th Cir. 1989)   Cited 8 times

    No. 88-2380. Argued February 16, 1989. Decided May 26, 1989. As Corrected May 30, 1989. Richard Cohen, N.L.R.B., Washington, D.C., for petitioner. Robin Wellford, Suelthaus Kaplan, P.C., St. Louis, Mo., for respondent. Petition from the National Labor Relations Board. Before CUMMINGS, and FLAUM, Circuit Judges, and ESCHBACH, Senior Circuit Judge. FLAUM, Circuit Judge. This is a petition for enforcement of an order of the National Labor Relations Board ("NLRB" or "Board"). Respondent Jakel Motors