§

Indiana Bell Telephone Company, Inc.

25-CA-218494 (N.L.R.B. Sep. 17, 2019)
Indiana Bell Telephone Company, Inc.

11 Cited authorities

  1. Metropolitan Edison Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    460 U.S. 693 (1983)   Cited 313 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a union may, under certain circumstances, waive members' NLRA rights

  2. Mastro Plastics Corp. v. Labor Board

    350 U.S. 270 (1956)   Cited 403 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that collective-bargaining agreement "must be read as a whole and in light of the law relating to it when it was made"

  3. Republic Aviation Corp. v. Board

    324 U.S. 793 (1945)   Cited 495 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Finding an absence of special circumstances where employer failed to introduce evidence of "unusual circumstances involving their plants."

  4. Boch Imports, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    826 F.3d 558 (1st Cir. 2016)   Cited 9 times
    Rejecting employer's reliance on W San Diego

  5. Adtranz ABB Daimler-Benz Transportation, N.A. v. National Labor Relations

    253 F.3d 19 (D.C. Cir. 2001)   Cited 20 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Finding "derogatory racial or sexual epithets" are not entitled to NLRA protection even when made within the context of union-protected activity

  6. Aroostook County v. N.L.R.B

    81 F.3d 209 (D.C. Cir. 1996)   Cited 18 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Upholding NLRB's jurisdiction under 29 U.S.C. § 158, part of the National Labor Relations Act, over an employer

  7. Meijer, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Bd.

    130 F.3d 1209 (6th Cir. 1997)   Cited 15 times
    Holding that under the balancing test in Republic Aviation, 324 U.S. 793, 65 S.Ct. 982, 89 L.Ed. 1372, "employees have a right to wear union insignia" on employerowned uniforms

  8. Taft Coal Sales v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.

    586 F. App'x 525 (11th Cir. 2014)

    No. 14-10618 10-02-2014 TAFT COAL SALES & ASSOCIATES, INC., WALTER ENERGY, INC., and WALTER MINERALS, INC., Petitioners/Cross-Respondents, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Respondent/Cross-Petitioner. PER CURIAM [DO NOT PUBLISH] Non-Argument Calendar Agency Nos. 10-CA-088599; 10-CA-093022 Petitions for Review of a Decision of the National Labor Relations Board Before WILSON, ROSENBAUM and DUBINA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: This case involves a petition for review and cross-application for enforcement

  9. United Parcel Service v. N.L.R.B

    41 F.3d 1068 (6th Cir. 1994)   Cited 7 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In United Parcel Serv. v. NLRB, 41 F.3d 1068 (6th Cir. 1994), we held that the employer's refusal to allow employees to wear union pins, while allowing the wearing of other pins, did not constitute discrimination in violation of Section(s) 8(a)(1).

  10. Burger King Corp. v. N.L.R.B

    725 F.2d 1053 (6th Cir. 1984)   Cited 17 times
    Noting that the challenged policy must be enforced in a “consistent and nondiscriminatory fashion”

  11. 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