Search for: "STATE v STEELE"
Results 1141 - 1160
of 2,306
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
5 Feb 2014, 8:23 am
United States Steel Corp., Case No. 12-417 (Jan. 27, 2014), addressing donning and doffing claims in the context of a unionized steel mill. [read post]
5 Feb 2014, 5:43 am
United States Steel. [read post]
4 Feb 2014, 8:31 am
The Supreme Court has unanimously rejected a claim that people working for United States Steel are entitled to compensation for the time spent dressing for work. [read post]
4 Feb 2014, 8:13 am
United States Steel Corp., which clarified what it means for an employee to be “changing clothes” under Section 3(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). [read post]
4 Feb 2014, 8:13 am
United States Steel Corp., which clarified what it means for an employee to be “changing clothes” under Section 3(o) of the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”). [read post]
3 Feb 2014, 8:26 pm
United States Steel Corp., 571 U.S. __ (2014) (slip opinion [...] [read post]
1 Feb 2014, 7:17 am
A manager at a company that sells steel was fired after sending an email opposing a plan to switch to a cheaper (and allegedly inferior) grade of steel without telling customers (Beers v ER Wagner Manufacturing Co). [read post]
29 Jan 2014, 10:49 am
United States Steel Corp., the Supreme Court addressed, in an unanimous opinion, the issue of whether a collective bargaining agreement covering union workers could exclude the covered workers from pay for certain types of donning and duffing time. [read post]
29 Jan 2014, 8:31 am
United States Steel Corporation. [read post]
29 Jan 2014, 5:28 am
Sam Bagenstos breaks down the decision in Sandifer v. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 7:09 pm
Sandifer v. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 4:23 pm
On Monday, January 27, 2014, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that a group of unionized steel workers at U.S. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 7:20 am
United States Steel Corp., No. 12–417. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 7:20 am
United States Steel Corp., No. 12–417. [read post]
28 Jan 2014, 5:35 am
United States, the Court limited the availability of enhanced sentences for drug dealers whose customers die or suffer serious injuries. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 10:50 am
” As readers of this Blog are aware, Sandifer v. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 9:55 am
United States Steel Corporation is here. [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 9:21 am
United States Steel Corporation.... [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 7:48 am
V). . . . [read post]
27 Jan 2014, 5:00 am
In Graham v. [read post]
