Vulcan Basement Waterproofing of Illinois, Inc., Petitioner/cross-Respondent v. National Labor Relations Board, Respondent/cross-Petitioner

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that if the General Counsel proves anti-union animus by a preponderance of the evidence, “the employer can then avoid a finding of an unfair labor practice if it can show that it would have taken the action regardless of the employee’s union activities”
• holding that in order “ [t]o prove a violation [of Section 8(a)(1) or (3)], the NLRB’s General Counsel must ‘prove that antiunion animus was a substantial or motivating factor in the employer’s deci- sion to make adverse employment decisions’ ”
• holding that if the General Counsel proves anti-union animus by a preponderance of the evi- dence, “the employer can then avoid a finding of an unfair labor practice if it can show that it would have taken the action regardless of the employee’s union activities”
• reasoning that “the decision-makers at Vulcan had to know of” the protected activities
• \[T]he employer can . . . avoid a finding of an unfair labor practice if it can show that it would have taken the action [Gibson's termination] regardless of the employee's union activities.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).