Search for: "Communications Workers v. Labor Board" Results 321 - 340 of 567
Sorted by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
23 Oct 2017, 3:00 am by Garrett Hinck
Deputy Assistant Secretaries of State Patrick Murphy and Marc Storella will testify alongside V. [read post]
30 Sep 2022, 5:08 pm by Anthony Zaller
Lastly, AB 2183 requires the board to develop an online web-based labor peace election process that will allow employers to indicate their labor peace choice online, and that will allow labor organizations to see whether a specific agricultural employer has agreed to a labor peace election campaign. [read post]
26 Apr 2011, 11:11 am by By Erik Lundegaard
"The case was the first by the National Labor Relations Board to assert that employers break the law by disciplining workers who post criticisms on social-networking Web sites," wrote The New York Times. [read post]
13 Apr 2007, 12:12 pm
A unit limited to the beverage employees is inappropriate because the employees do not possess a community of interest separate and distinct from the restaurant and catering employees, the Board held. [read post]
18 Jul 2021, 7:37 am by Andrew Delaney
In this case, the Commissioner of the Department of Labor reasoned that the old language applied. [read post]
29 Jan 2018, 8:16 am by William Ford
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
5 Feb 2018, 7:23 am by William Ford
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
12 Feb 2018, 7:59 am by William Ford
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
20 Feb 2018, 7:26 am by William Ford
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
5 Mar 2018, 6:55 am by William Ford
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm by Public Employment Law Press
Clearly this is counter production, especially in a layoff situation where the abolishment of positions usually undertaken to reduce the employer’s personnel service costs.[22] The selection of individuals for appointment to positions in the several jurisdictional classes of positions in the classified service -- the competitive class, the non-competitive class, the exempt class and the labor class – reflect the requirements of Article V, §6 of the New York State… [read post]
15 Aug 2021, 9:30 pm by Public Employment Law Press
Clearly this is counter production, especially in a layoff situation where the abolishment of positions usually undertaken to reduce the employer’s personnel service costs.[22] The selection of individuals for appointment to positions in the several jurisdictional classes of positions in the classified service -- the competitive class, the non-competitive class, the exempt class and the labor class – reflect the requirements of Article V, §6 of the New York State… [read post]
18 Dec 2017, 3:00 am by Garrett Hinck
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
11 Dec 2017, 3:00 am by Garrett Hinck
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
2 Jan 2018, 9:07 am by Matthew Kahn
Supreme Court last cited one of its pieces in McDonald v. [read post]
17 Jul 2023, 1:45 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Board Certified in Labor and Employment Law By the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, Scribe for the ABA JCEB Annual Agency Meeting with OCR, Chair-Elect of the ABA TIPS Medicine and Law Committee, Chair of the ABA International Section Life Sciences Committee, and Past Group Chair and current Welfare Plan Committee Chair of the ABA RPTE Employee Benefits & Other Compensation Group, former Vice President and Executive Director of the North Texas Health Care… [read post]
10 Feb 2017, 10:03 am by MBettman
Assn., 49 Ohio St.3d 129 (1990) (presumption of validity of an arbitrator’s award) Board of Trustees of Miami Township v. [read post]
2 May 2022, 2:12 pm by Cynthia Marcotte Stamer
Emotional distress damages are not recoverable in a private action to enforce the disability discrimination and accommodation requirements of either the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (“Rehab Act”) or the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) according to the May 1, 2022 United States Supreme Court ruling in Cummings v. [read post]