Search for: "American Federation of Labor v. Labor Board"
Results 201 - 220
of 960
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 Aug 2020, 9:05 pm
Department of Labor and U.S. [read post]
5 Aug 2020, 2:52 pm
While there are many critical questions to ask about the specter of federal officers occupying an American city, senators should not lose sight of an issue lurking in the background—the fact that Wolf’s tenure as acting secretary violates the law. [read post]
30 Jul 2020, 9:05 pm
Supreme Court’s Department of Homeland Security v. [read post]
29 Jul 2020, 6:30 am
Board of Education. [read post]
22 Jul 2020, 7:00 am
The trend continues with the case of Janus v. [read post]
20 Jul 2020, 11:01 am
Our phased reopening in conditions where case incidence remains high ensures a long and slow recovery, not a V-shaped recovery. [read post]
6 Jul 2020, 9:44 am
”), aff’d sub nom., Juni v. [read post]
24 Jun 2020, 7:01 pm
Bennett, American Tradition Partnership v. [read post]
23 Jun 2020, 5:50 am
Labor force participation—especially for men—has fallen to its lowest point since World War II.[2] Unlike that immediate post-war period, it is now more common for both partners in a married household to work. [read post]
19 Jun 2020, 4:53 pm
As we previously discussed earlier this month, District Court Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson issued an Order in American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations v. [read post]
15 Jun 2020, 1:38 pm
Gould served as Chairman of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB, 1994–98) and subsequently Chairman of the California Agricultural Labor Relations Board (2014-2017). [read post]
9 Jun 2020, 7:00 am
The National Labor Relations Board decided in 2019 that it does not have jurisdiction over labor complaints from gig workers. [read post]
4 Jun 2020, 1:44 pm
To be clear, no federal charges have been brought. [read post]
21 May 2020, 2:35 pm
In addition, reductions for any employees must continue to comply with applicable state, federal, or local minimum wage laws. [read post]
18 May 2020, 9:00 pm
In a recent ruling, Durham v. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
9 May 2020, 2:20 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
1 May 2020, 5:16 am
"Similarly, in Szumigala v Hicksville Union Free School District, 148 AD2d 621, the Appellate Division, citing Cheektowaga v Nyquest, 38 NY2d 137, held that a seniority clause in a Taylor Law agreement violated §2510 of the Education Law when it permitted seniority in different tenure areas to be combined for the purposes of determining seniority with the District for the purposes of layoff.However, in Gee v Board of Educ. of Rochester City Sch. [read post]
26 Apr 2020, 9:10 pm
Jackson in Wong Yang Sung v. [read post]
