TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

National Labor Relations Board v. C.R. Adams Trucking, Inc., and Michael Cates

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. C.R. ADAMS TRUCKING, INC., and Michael Cates, Respondents

Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. C.R. Adams Trucking, Inc., 767 F.2d 1276 (8th Cir. 1985)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
July 17, 1985
Docket
No. 85-1265
Judges
Arnold, Henley, Gibson
Citations
767 F.2d 1276120 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 25391985 U.S. App. LEXIS 20804

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM.

Respondents C.R. Adams Trucking, Inc., and Michael Cates contest the Board’s order awarding back pay to Bruce F. Pine and Robert Becker.

1

The order awarded back pay to Pine for the period from September 11, 1979, to June 26, 1982, and stated that he was entitled to $17,462 with interest. Becker’s back pay award was $18,438 with interest, and it covered the period from September 11, 1979, to June 30,1982. Respondents argue in this appeal that Pine and Becker are not entitled to back pay past the Spring of 1980. They say that starting in the Spring of 1980, they switched from tandem trucks' to triaxle vehicles, and that tri-axles require driving experience that neither Becker nor Pine had.

The National Labor Relations Board adopted the ALJ’s recommended order. The AU found that driving a tri-axle vehicle is more difficult and more demanding than driving a tandem truck. The employer’s burden, however, is to show that Pine and Becker would have been discharged when the company converted exclusively to tri-axles. See NLRB v. Midwest Hanger Co., 550 F.2d 1101, 1104-05 (8th Cir.1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 830 , 98 S.Ct. 112 , 54 L.Ed.2d 90 (1977). The ALJ concluded that Adams and Cates had not met their burden, and substantial evidence supports his decision. The Board’s order is enforced.

1

. The Board’s order was entered on remand from our decision in NLRB v. C.R. Adams Trucking, Inc., 718 F.2d 869 (8th Cir.1983), holding that respondents had unlawfully discharged Pine and Becker. The Board’s order is reported at 272 NLRB No. 200 (November 27, 1984).

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1985: 11989: 21993: 119852026peak 1989 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Aguinaga v. United Food And Commercial Workers993 F.2d 1463 (10th Cir. 1993)
  2. Aguinaga v. United Food & Commercial Workers International Union720 F. Supp. 862 (D. Kan. 1989)
  3. National Labor Relations Board v. Croft Metals, Inc.771 F.2d 849 (5th Cir. 1985)
  4. Aguinaga v. UNITED FOOD & COM. WORKERS INTERN.720 F. Supp. 862 (D. Kan. 1989)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Midwest Hanger Co., 550 F.2d 1101 (8th Cir. 1977) 23
Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. C.R. Adams Trucking, Inc., 718 F.2d 869 (8th Cir. 1983) 2

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list