Search for: "Union Pacific R. Co" Results 81 - 100 of 256
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
29 May 2016, 9:38 am by Schachtman
The Pacific Legal Foundation also filed, as did Elementis Chemicals Inc. [read post]
26 May 2016, 2:50 pm by Alex R. McQuade
” Beijing is set to deploy nuclear-armed submarines into the Pacific Ocean for the first time. [read post]
16 May 2016, 8:37 am by Joy Waltemath
The NLRB’s 2001 decision in Levitz Furniture Co. of the Pacific barred an employer from withdrawing recognition from an incumbent union unless it was able to objectively show by a preponderance of the evidence that the union had lost the support of a majority of bargaining unit employees. [read post]
20 Apr 2016, 5:58 am by Declan Hamill
Patented medicines also represent less than 40% of total drug spending in Canada[iii], and public drug spending in Canada is third to last in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)[iv]. [read post]
17 Apr 2016, 8:27 am by Barry Sookman
I recently had the privilege of speaking about the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) at the Fordham 24th Annual Intellectual Property Law and Policy Conference, a stellar international IP conference. [read post]
28 Mar 2016, 7:36 am by John McFarland
He is a co-founder and member of the Dallas Producers Club and member of the Dallas Petroleum Club and of the Society of International Business Fellows. [read post]
7 Feb 2016, 5:45 am by Peter S. Grant
Are these rules vulnerable to attack under the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement that has been recently negotiated? [read post]
10 Jan 2016, 4:59 am by SHG
In a line of decisions, however, going back perhaps as far as Union Pacific R. [read post]
22 Sep 2015, 8:46 am by Joy Waltemath
We cannot make such a determination” (Pacific Coast Supply, LLC dba Anderson Lumber Co. v NLRB, September 18, 2015, Garland, M.). [read post]
31 Jul 2015, 5:25 am by Mary Jane Wilmoth
Union Pacific Railroad Co., ARB No. 15-036, ALJ No. 2011-FRS-39 (ARB May 29, 2015) Order Dismissing Petition for Review PDF Summary: The Respondent withdrew its petition for ARB review. [read post]
8 Jun 2015, 6:23 am by Joy Waltemath
” The buttons were not so offensive as to lose protection under the NLRA, a three-member NLRB panel held, and the company failed to establish that special circumstances warrant its ban on the offending buttons, or its discipline of workers who refused to remove them (Pacific Bell Telephone Co. dba AT&T, June 2, 2015). [read post]