« Bathroom peeping did not create hostile work environment | Main | "Adverse employment action" argument in Supreme Court »
Dana Corp neutrality agreement before the NLRB
April 11, 2006 by Ross Runkel at LawMemo
The NLRB issued a new call for amici briefs relating to a new case on neutrality agreements. Here is the whole press release, including the Board Order:
FOR IMMEDIATE
RELEASE (R-2586)
Thursday, March 30, 2006 202/273-1991
LABOR
BOARD INVITES AMICUS BRIEFS TO BE FILED
ON DANA CORP. PENDING CASES
The
National Labor Relations Board today issued a notice inviting additional
interested amici to file briefs in Dana
Corporation and Auto
Workers (UAW) International, Cases 7-CA-46965, et al. and 7-CB-14083, et
al. on or before April 27, 2006. The
case presents the issue, among others, of whether and to what extent an
employer and a union can lawfully negotiate and reach an agreement which sets
forth the conditions under which union organizing will occur, a provision for
card-check recognition, and some of the terms and conditions which will be
embodied in any eventual collective-bargaining agreement.
The
matter was transferred to the Board following the issuance of the
administrative law judge’s decision (JD-24-05) on April 11, 2005.
The General Counsel
and the individual Charging Parties filed exceptions and briefs.
Respondent Dana filed an answering brief on June 28, 2005, and on
that same date the AFL-CIO filed a Motion seeking permission to become an
amicus and to file a joint brief with Respondent UAW in opposition to the
exceptions. The UAW and AFL-CIO
joint answering brief accompanied the Motion, and on August 11, 2005 the
amicus request was granted and the joint brief was accepted.
Additional
interested amici are invited to file briefs, not to exceed 35 pages, with the
Board in
The full text of the Board’s notice is attached.
*
* *
BEFORE THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
DANA CORPORATION
Respondent Employer
and
INTERNATIONAL UNION,
UNITED AUTOMOBILE,
AEROSPACE, AND AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENT
WORKERS OF
Respondent
and
Cases 7-CA-46965
7-CB-14083
and
JOSEPH MONTAGUE
Cases
7-CA-47078
7-CB-14119
and
KENNETH A. GRAY
Cases
7-CA-47079
7-CB-14120
NOTICE
AND INVITATION TO FILE BRIEFS
This matter was transferred to the Board following the issuance of the administrative law judge’s decision (JD-24-05) on April 11, 2005.1 Thereafter, the General Counsel and the individual Charging Parties filed exceptions and briefs. Respondent Dana filed an answering brief on June 28, 2005, and on that same date the AFL-CIO filed a Motion seeking permission to become an amicus and to file a joint brief with Respondent UAW in opposition to the exceptions. The UAW and AFL-CIO joint answering brief accompanied the Motion and on August 11, 2005 the amicus request was granted and the joint brief was accepted.2
Others who may have an interest in this matter are invited to seek
amicus status3
and to file briefs with the Board in
Dated,
By direction of the Board:
Lester A. Heltzer
Executive Secretary
National
Labor Relations Board
Offices
of the Board
Participants Docket and Order
07-CA-46965-001
Dana Corporation
Respondent
Employer
Dana
Corporation
Attn:
Barbara Peterson
Saint
Johns, MI 48879
Fax: (989)
224-3280
Respondent
Employer
Dana
Corporation
4500
Dorr Street
Tel: (419)535-4719
Attn:
Gary Golden
Law
Department
Respondent
Employer MR
Emily
J. Christiansen Esq.
Hogan
& Hartson LLP
Respondent
International
Union UAW
Attn:
Ron Gettelfinger, President
Respondent
Union MR
Betsey
A. Engel Esq. &
Blair
Simmons Esq.
International
Union UAW Legal
Charging
Party Individual MR
William
A. Messenger Esq.
8001
Braddock Road
Tel:
(703)321-8510
National
Right to Work Legal
Defense
Foundation
Charging
Party Individual
Gary
L. Smeltzer Jr.
Charging
Party Individual
Joseph
Montague
5612
Wildcat Road
Tel:
Charging
Party Individual
Kenneth
A. Gray
330
NLRB
Region
NATIONAL
LABOR
REGION
07 -
1
The decision can be reviewed on the Board’s website at http://www.nlrb.gov/nlrb/shared_files/decisions/ALJ/JD-24-05.pdf.
2
On February 10,
2006 the AFL-CIO filed a Motion to Present Oral Argument, and on February
21, 2006 the Charging Parties filed an opposition.
That Motion remains under consideration by the Board.
3
The grant of amicus
status in Dana Corporation,
8-RD-1976, and Metaldyne Corporation
(Metaldyne Sintered Products), 6-RD-1518 et al., does not extend to the
instant proceeding. Accordingly,
those granted amicus status in the above cases who wish to seek amicus
status in the instant proceeding must file a separate request with the
Board.
[4]
Please also submit in your mailing your document on a CD using Portable
Document Format (*.pdf). Persons
who do not have the ability to submit documents in PDF format may submit
documents in Microsoft Word (*.doc).
|
Editor: Ross Runkel, Professor of Law Emeritus. email Ross@LawMemo.Com, Phone 503-399-8028. Copyright LawMemo, Inc.
|

