Search for: "Local 3 v. Nlrb" Results 241 - 260 of 277
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
9 Aug 2008, 4:45 am
NLRB, 703 F.2d 876 (5th Cir. 1983) and distinguished the facts in this case from Nathan Katz Reality LLC v. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 4:40 am
  In Carpenters & Millrights Local 2471 v. [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 6:48 pm
Catskill Mountain Mechanical Corp. and its alter ego, Plant Maintenance Services, Inc. (3-CA-26213; 352 NLRB No. 101) West Coxsackie, NY June 30, 2008. [read post]
11 Jun 2008, 2:19 pm
  In finding its application of Kravis proper, the Board found that the Respondent could not have relied on the due process standard overruled by Kravis as well settled when it withdrew recognition of the union, because the Supreme Court's earlier decision in NLRB v. [read post]
14 Mar 2008, 11:21 am
In its previous decision in The McBurney Corp., 351 NLRB No. 49 (2007), the Board found that the Respondent violated Section 8(a)(3) and (1) of the Act by discriminatorily refusing to hire certain union-affiliated applicants. [read post]
22 Feb 2008, 1:53 pm
NLRB - Staff summarized 3 decisions. [read post]
7 Jan 2008, 11:31 am
The leading case on this issue is NLRB v. [read post]
30 Nov 2007, 9:41 am
  See Wright Line, 251 NLRB 1083 (1980), enfd. 662 f.2d 899 (1st Cir. 1981), cert. denied 455 U.S. 989 (1982), approved in NLRB v. [read post]
13 Oct 2007, 9:18 am
  On February 1, 2002, shortly before the hearing in this case began, Local 623 merged with five other locals to form Local 500. [read post]
24 Sep 2007, 4:38 pm
Charge filed by Northern California Media Workers Guild/Typographical Local #39521, TNG-CWA; complaint alleged violations of Section 8(a)(1), (3), and (5). [read post]
17 Sep 2007, 10:14 pm
[the Respondent's] control," as required under NLRB v. [read post]
29 Aug 2007, 10:22 am
"  Ross Stores, Inc. v. [read post]
23 Aug 2007, 4:04 pm
Plumbers Local 100, 421 U.S. 616 (1975). [read post]
10 Aug 2007, 3:03 pm
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (Carpenters Union Local No. 1109 v. [read post]