§

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

28-CA-167277 (N.L.R.B. Aug. 31, 2016)
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

10 Cited authorities

  1. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. J. Weingarten, Inc.

    420 U.S. 251 (1975)   Cited 434 times   64 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an employer commits an unfair labor practice by compelling an employee to attend an investigatory meeting that could lead to discipline without allowing the employee to bring a union witness

  2. Labor Board v. Laughlin

    301 U.S. 1 (1937)   Cited 1,499 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the National Labor Relations Act applied only to interstate commerce, and upholding its constitutionality on that basis

  3. Certiorari Denied

    536 U.S. 904 (2002)   Cited 88 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing PLRA imposed limits on recovery for emotional harm

  4. Nat. Licorice Co. v. Labor Bd.

    309 U.S. 350 (1940)   Cited 315 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that requiring employees to sign individual contracts waiving their rights to self-organization and collective bargaining violates § 8 of the NLRA

  5. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Fant Milling Co.

    360 U.S. 301 (1959)   Cited 106 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an untimely allegation of an unlawful unilateral wage increase was sufficiently related to a timely refusal-to-bargain charge, because the wage increase "largely influenced" the Board's finding that an unlawful refusal to bargain had occurred

  6. Labor Board v. I. M. Electric Co.

    318 U.S. 9 (1943)   Cited 108 times
    In N.L.R.B. v. Indiana Michigan Electric Co., 318 U.S. 9, at page 28, 63 S.Ct. 394, at page 405, 87 L.Ed. 579, the Supreme Court stated the general fundamental principles with respect to findings of fact by the Board, saying that the reviewing court is given discretion to see that before a party's rights are foreclosed his case has been fairly heard, and "Findings cannot be said to have been fairly reached unless material evidence which might impeach, as well as that which will support, its findings, is heard and weighed."

  7. Epilepsy Foundation of N.E. Ohio v. N.L.R.B

    268 F.3d 1095 (D.C. Cir. 2001)   Cited 20 times   4 Legal Analyses

    No. 00-1332. Argued October 2, 2001. Decided November 2, 2001. Petition for Review and Cross-Application for Enforcement of an Order of the National Labor Relations Board. Anita Barondes argued the cause for petitioner. With her on the briefs were Peter Chatilovicz, Ronald A. Lindsay, and Steven M. Moss. Maurice Baskin, Stephen A. Bokat, Robin S. Conrad, Heather L. MacDougall, Daniel V. Yager, Harold P. Coxson Jr., Burton J. Fishman, Robert J. Verdisco, Jan S. Amundson, and Quentin Riegel were on

  8. Drug Plastics Glass Co., Inc. v. N.L.R.B

    44 F.3d 1017 (D.C. Cir. 1995)   Cited 18 times   1 Legal Analyses
    In Drug Plastics, 30 F.3d at 172-73, we upheld the Board's test pursuant to Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, 467 U.S. 837, 104 S.Ct. 2778, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984), as a permissible interpretation of § 10(b).

  9. G.W. Galloway Co. v. N.L.R.B

    856 F.2d 275 (D.C. Cir. 1988)   Cited 16 times
    Requiring a "significant factual affiliation" between complaint and charge allegations

  10. Section 160 - Prevention of unfair labor practices

    29 U.S.C. § 160   Cited 7,058 times   23 Legal Analyses
    Finding that the procedures for unfair labor practice cases mandated by R.C. 4117.12 and 4117.13 are substantively identical to those established in NLRA to govern unfair labor practice cases before NLRB