TNT Logistics North America

8 Cited authorities

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"
Tellepsen Pipeline Services Co. v. N.L.R.B
320 F.3d 554 (5th Cir. 2003) Cited 26 times
Explaining the standard for unlawful discharge
N.L.R.B. v. Pentre Elec., Inc.
998 F.2d 363 (6th Cir. 1993) Cited 33 times
Explaining that a "statement is an unlawful threat" if it "is subjectively phrased in that it conveys that the employer will act on its own initiative to punish its employees as the result of anti-union animus"
DTR Industries, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd.
39 F.3d 106 (6th Cir. 1994) Cited 17 times
In DTR I, the predictions made were about possible lost business in the face of unionization, contained in a letter from the employer's president to its employees shortly before a union election.
N.L.R.B. v. Curwood Inc.
397 F.3d 548 (7th Cir. 2005) Cited 4 times 1 Legal Analyses
Discussing differences between expert and lay testimony and concluding that agent's testimony about firearms collection was expert testimony, as it was based on his "training and experience"
Contech Division v. Natioanl Labor Relations Board
164 F.3d 297 (6th Cir. 1998) Cited 4 times
Holding that letters from the union during an election campaign containing arguably misleading statements did not affect the employees' right to a free and fair choice
Charge Card Ass'n v. N.L.R.B
653 F.2d 272 (6th Cir. 1981) Cited 12 times
In Charge Card Ass'n v. NLRB, 653 F.2d 272 (6th Cir. 1981), our court for the first time indicated that "the proper test for evaluating mixed-motive cases is whether punishment of a protected act... was a dominant motive in the employer's actions."
Hertzka Knowles v. N.L.R.B
503 F.2d 625 (9th Cir. 1974) Cited 16 times
Rejecting "purely adversarial model of labor relations"

TNT Logistics North America

8 Cited authorities

Holding a bargaining order may be necessary "to re-establish the conditions as they existed before the employer's unlawful campaign"

Explaining the standard for unlawful discharge

Explaining that a "statement is an unlawful threat" if it "is subjectively phrased in that it conveys that the employer will act on its own initiative to punish its employees as the result of anti-union animus"

In DTR I, the predictions made were about possible lost business in the face of unionization, contained in a letter from the employer's president to its employees shortly before a union election.

Discussing differences between expert and lay testimony and concluding that agent's testimony about firearms collection was expert testimony, as it was based on his "training and experience"

Holding that letters from the union during an election campaign containing arguably misleading statements did not affect the employees' right to a free and fair choice

In Charge Card Ass'n v. NLRB, 653 F.2d 272 (6th Cir. 1981), our court for the first time indicated that "the proper test for evaluating mixed-motive cases is whether punishment of a protected act... was a dominant motive in the employer's actions."

Rejecting "purely adversarial model of labor relations"