A · Element outline
Labels preserve the recorded AND / OR / EXCEPTION / DEFENSE structure.
Claim structure
Expression key: & = AND; | = OR; ! = exclusion / negation. Parentheses preserve grouping.
29usc158:a1-interference
employer and covered-employee and protected-right and interference and not protected-speech and not special-circumstancesIndependent §8(a)(1) route; the special-circumstances defense is scoped to the insignia-restriction variant, not all interference.
29usc158:a2-domination-support
employer and covered-employee and organization-interference and not working-hours-conference and not construction-agreement§8(a)(2): domination, interference or financial/other support are alternative statutory acts.
29usc158:a3-discrimination
employer and covered-employee and employment-discrimination and union-purpose and not same-decision and not lawful-union-security and not construction-agreementMotivating-factor/same-decision sequence models the sampled discharge cases, not every possible §8(a)(3) proceeding.
29usc158:a4-retaliation
employer and covered-employee and board-participation and retaliatory-actionSeparate statutory route for charges/testimony; no dedicated §8(a)(4) interpretation was resolved by this six-case sample.
29usc158:a5-refusal
employer and covered-employee and representative and refusal-to-bargain§8(a)(5) with §8(d)/§9(a); majority/representation, impasse, waiver and bargaining-subject questions require their own case-specific inquiry.
Constraints
Section 8(a)(5) violation also violates Section 8(a)(1)
These are related statutory routes, not two independent factual findings.
Protected noncoercive expression alone cannot constitute or evidence an unfair labor practice
Section c applies throughout the subchapter; it does not protect threats, force, promises of benefit or independent unlawful acts.
Special circumstances applies only to the protected employee-insignia restriction theory
In-N-Out supplies a judge/Board-made balancing defense for that variant, not a universal defense to interrogation, discrimination, or statutory bargaining duties.
Any applicable employer-duty breach can establish the refusal element; the routes are not cumulative requirements.
Each child is an alternative failure predicate: satisfaction means breach of an actually applicable employer duty, not the existence or performance of the duty. Contract notices require a party seeking termination/modification of an existing agreement; health-care modifications require the institution/contract conditions. Paragraph d(B) initial-dispute notice is a union duty, and d(C) FMCS communication is an agency duty: those are contextual anchors, not independent employer breaches. The employer's d(C) participation duty remains distinct. Striker-status effects inform coverage but do not independently prove employer refusal.
Ordinary union-security permission requires all applicable statutory safeguards, not merely a membership clause.
Independence, the ordinary waiting period, representative/rescission conditions and final equal-membership/financial safeguards qualify the a(3) exception together. Section f's distinct construction-agreement allowance supplies only its enumerated alternatives and preserves the final a(3) proviso. State section164(b) limits and the financial-core interpretation remain applicable as recorded under the parent.
Law modes, protocols and effects
law
Law kind: substantive
Statute text with element anchors
Overlapping highlights link to the first element; the anchor key links every associated element. All offsets refer to unchanged source text.
§158. Unfair labor practices
(a) Unfair labor practices by employer It shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer-
(1) to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 157 of this title;
(2) to dominate or interfere with the formation or administration of any labor organization or contribute financial or other support to it: Provided, That subject to rules and regulations made and published by the Board pursuant to section 156 of this title, an employer shall not be prohibited from permitting employees to confer with him during working hours without loss of time or pay;
(3) by discrimination in regard to hire or tenure of employment or any term or condition of employment to encourage or discourage membership in any labor organization: Provided, That nothing in this subchapter, or in any other statute of the United States, shall preclude an employer from making an agreement with a labor organization (not established, maintained, or assisted by any action defined in this subsection as an unfair labor practice) to require as a condition of employment membership therein on or after the thirtieth day following the beginning of such employment or the effective date of such agreement, whichever is the later, (i) if such labor organization is the representative of the employees as provided in section 159(a) of this title, in the appropriate collective-bargaining unit covered by such agreement when made, and (ii) unless following an election held as provided in section 159(e) of this title within one year preceding the effective date of such agreement, the Board shall have certified that at least a majority of the employees eligible to vote in such election have voted to rescind the authority of such labor organization to make such an agreement: Provided further, That no employer shall justify any discrimination against an employee for nonmembership in a labor organization (A) if he has reasonable grounds for believing that such membership was not available to the employee on the same terms and conditions generally applicable to other members, or (B) if he has reasonable grounds for believing that membership was denied or terminated for reasons other than the failure of the employee to tender the periodic dues and the initiation fees uniformly required as a condition of acquiring or retaining membership;
(4) to discharge or otherwise discriminate against an employee because he has filed charges or given testimony under this subchapter;
(5) to refuse to bargain collectively with the representatives of his employees, subject to the provisions of section 159(a) of this title.
(b) Unfair labor practices by labor organization It shall be an unfair labor practice for a labor organization or its agents-
(1) to restrain or coerce (A) employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 157 of this title: Provided, That this paragraph shall not impair the right of a labor organization to prescribe its own rules with respect to the acquisition or retention of membership therein; or (B) an employer in the selection of his representatives for the purposes of collective bargaining or the adjustment of grievances;
(2) to cause or attempt to cause an employer to discriminate against an employee in violation of subsection (a)(3) or to discriminate against an employee with respect to whom membership in such organization has been denied or terminated on some ground other than his failure to tender the periodic dues and the initiation fees uniformly required as a condition of acquiring or retaining membership;
(3) to refuse to bargain collectively with an employer, provided it is the representative of his employees subject to the provisions of section 159(a) of this title; (4)(i) to engage in, or to induce or encourage any individual employed by any person engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce to engage in, a strike or a refusal in the course of his employment to use, manufacture, process, transport, or otherwise handle or work on any goods, articles, materials, or commodities or to perform any services; or (ii) to threaten, coerce, or restrain any person engaged in commerce or in an industry affecting commerce, where in either case an object thereof is-
(A) forcing or requiring any employer or self-employed person to join any labor or employer organization or to enter into any agreement which is prohibited by subsection (e);
(B) forcing or requiring any person to cease using, selling, handling, transporting, or otherwise dealing in the products of any other producer, processor, or manufacturer, or to cease doing business with any other person, or forcing or requiring any other employer to recognize or bargain with a labor organization as the representative of his employees unless such labor organization has been certified as the representative of such employees under the provisions of section 159 of this title: Provided, That nothing contained in this clause (B) shall be construed to make unlawful, where not otherwise unlawful, any primary strike or primary picketing;
(C) forcing or requiring any employer to recognize or bargain with a particular labor organization as the representative of his employees if another labor organization has been certified as the representative of such employees under the provisions of section 159 of this title;
(D) forcing or requiring any employer to assign particular work to employees in a particular labor organization or in a particular trade, craft, or class rather than to employees in another labor organization or in another trade, craft, or class, unless such employer is failing to conform to an order or certification of the Board determining the bargaining representative for employees performing such work: Provided, That nothing contained in this subsection shall be construed to make unlawful a refusal by any person to enter upon the premises of any employer (other than his own employer), if the employees of such employer are engaged in a strike ratified or approved by a representative of such employees whom such employer is required to recognize under this subchapter: Provided further, That for the purposes of this paragraph (4) only, nothing contained in such paragraph shall be construed to prohibit publicity, other than picketing, for the purpose of truthfully advising the public, including consumers and members of a labor organization, that a product or products are produced by an employer with whom the labor organization has a primary dispute and are distributed by another employer, as long as such publicity does not have an effect of inducing any individual employed by any person other than the primary employer in the course of his employment to refuse to pick up, deliver, or transport any goods, or not to perform any services, at the establishment of the employer engaged in such distribution;
(5) to require of employees covered by an agreement authorized under subsection (a)(3) the payment, as a condition precedent to becoming a member of such organization, of a fee in an amount which the Board finds excessive or discriminatory under all the circumstances. In making such a finding, the Board shall consider, among other relevant factors, the practices and customs of labor organizations in the particular industry, and the wages currently paid to the employees affected;
(6) to cause or attempt to cause an employer to pay or deliver or agree to pay or deliver any money or other thing of value, in the nature of an exaction, for services which are not performed or not to be performed; and
(7) to picket or cause to be picketed, or threaten to picket or cause to be picketed, any employer where an object thereof is forcing or requiring an employer to recognize or bargain with a labor organization as the representative of his employees, or forcing or requiring the employees of an employer to accept or select such labor organization as their collective bargaining representative, unless such labor organization is currently certified as the representative of such employees:
(A) where the employer has lawfully recognized in accordance with this subchapter any other labor organization and a question concerning representation may not appropriately be raised under section 159(c) of this title,
(B) where within the preceding twelve months a valid election under section 159(c) of this title has been conducted, or
(C) where such picketing has been conducted without a petition under section 159(c) of this title being filed within a reasonable period of time not to exceed thirty days from the commencement of such picketing: Provided, That when such a petition has been filed the Board shall forthwith, without regard to the provisions of section 159(c)(1) of this title or the absence of a showing of a substantial interest on the part of the labor organization, direct an election in such unit as the Board finds to be appropriate and shall certify the results thereof: Provided further, That nothing in this subparagraph (C) shall be construed to prohibit any picketing or other publicity for the purpose of truthfully advising the public (including consumers) that an employer does not employ members of, or have a contract with, a labor organization, unless an effect of such picketing is to induce any individual employed by any other person in the course of his employment, not to pick up, deliver or transport any goods or not to perform any services. Nothing in this paragraph (7) shall be construed to permit any act which would otherwise be an unfair labor practice under this subsection.
(c) Expression of views without threat of reprisal or force or promise of benefit The expressing of any views, argument, or opinion, or the dissemination thereof, whether in written, printed, graphic, or visual form, shall not constitute or be evidence of an unfair labor practice under any of the provisions of this subchapter, if such expression contains no threat of reprisal or force or promise of benefit.
(d) Obligation to bargain collectively For the purposes of this section, to bargain collectively is the performance of the mutual obligation of the employer and the representative of the employees to meet at reasonable times and confer in good faith with respect to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment, or the negotiation of an agreement, or any question arising thereunder, and the execution of a written contract incorporating any agreement reached if requested by either party, but such obligation does not compel either party to agree to a proposal or require the making of a concession: Provided, That where there is in effect a collective-bargaining contract covering employees in an industry affecting commerce, the duty to bargain collectively shall also mean that no party to such contract shall terminate or modify such contract, unless the party desiring such termination or modification-
(1) serves a written notice upon the other party to the contract of the proposed termination or modification sixty days prior to the expiration date thereof, or in the event such contract contains no expiration date, sixty days prior to the time it is proposed to make such termination or modification;
(2) offers to meet and confer with the other party for the purpose of negotiating a new contract or a contract containing the proposed modifications;
(3) notifies the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service within thirty days after such notice of the existence of a dispute, and simultaneously therewith notifies any State or Territorial agency established to mediate and conciliate disputes within the State or Territory where the dispute occurred, provided no agreement has been reached by that time; and
(4) continues in full force and effect, without resorting to strike or lock-out, all the terms and conditions of the existing contract for a period of sixty days after such notice is given or until the expiration date of such contract, whichever occurs later: The duties imposed upon employers, employees, and labor organizations by paragraphs (2) to (4) of this subsection shall become inapplicable upon an intervening certification of the Board, under which the labor organization or individual, which is a party to the contract, has been superseded as or ceased to be the representative of the employees subject to the provisions of section 159(a) of this title, and the duties so imposed shall not be construed as requiring either party to discuss or agree to any modification of the terms and conditions contained in a contract for a fixed period, if such modification is to become effective before such terms and conditions can be reopened under the provisions of the contract. Any employee who engages in a strike within any notice period specified in this subsection, or who engages in any strike within the appropriate period specified in subsection (g) of this section, shall lose his status as an employee of the employer engaged in the particular labor dispute, for the purposes of sections 158, 159, and 160 of this title, but such loss of status for such employee shall terminate if and when he is reemployed by such employer. Whenever the collective bargaining involves employees of a health care institution, the provisions of this subsection shall be modified as follows:
(A) The notice of paragraph (1) of this subsection shall be ninety days; the notice of paragraph (3) of this subsection shall be sixty days; and the contract period of paragraph (4) of this subsection shall be ninety days.
(B) Where the bargaining is for an initial agreement following certification or recognition, at least thirty days' notice of the existence of a dispute shall be given by the labor organization to the agencies set forth in paragraph (3) of this subsection.
(C) After notice is given to the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service under either clause (A) or (B) of this sentence, the Service shall promptly communicate with the parties and use its best efforts, by mediation and conciliation, to bring them to agreement. The parties shall participate fully and promptly in such meetings as may be undertaken by the Service for the purpose of aiding in a settlement of the dispute.
(e) Enforceability of contract or agreement to boycott any other employer; exception It shall be an unfair labor practice for any labor organization and any employer to enter into any contract or agreement, express or implied, whereby such employer ceases or refrains or agrees to cease or refrain from handling, using, selling, transporting or otherwise dealing in any of the products of any other employer, or to cease doing business with any other person, and any contract or agreement entered into heretofore or hereafter containing such an agreement shall be to such extent unenforcible 1 and void: Provided, That nothing in this subsection shall apply to an agreement between a labor organization and an employer in the construction industry relating to the contracting or subcontracting of work to be done at the site of the construction, alteration, painting, or repair of a building, structure, or other work: Provided further, That for the purposes of this subsection and subsection (b)(4)(B) the terms "any employer", "any person engaged in commerce or an industry affecting commerce", and "any person" when used in relation to the terms "any other producer, processor, or manufacturer", "any other employer", or "any other person" shall not include persons in the relation of a jobber, manufacturer, contractor, or subcontractor working on the goods or premises of the jobber or manufacturer or performing parts of an integrated process of production in the apparel and clothing industry: Provided further, That nothing in this subchapter shall prohibit the enforcement of any agreement which is within the foregoing exception.
(f) Agreement covering employees in the building and construction industry It shall not be an unfair labor practice under subsections (a) and (b) of this section for an employer engaged primarily in the building and construction industry to make an agreement covering employees engaged (or who, upon their employment, will be engaged) in the building and construction industry with a labor organization of which building and construction employees are members (not established, maintained, or assisted by any action defined in subsection (a) as an unfair labor practice) because (1) the majority status of such labor organization has not been established under the provisions of section 159 of this title prior to the making of such agreement, or (2) such agreement requires as a condition of employment, membership in such labor organization after the seventh day following the beginning of such employment or the effective date of the agreement, whichever is later, or (3) such agreement requires the employer to notify such labor organization of opportunities for employment with such employer, or gives such labor organization an opportunity to refer qualified applicants for such employment, or (4) such agreement specifies minimum training or experience qualifications for employment or provides for priority in opportunities for employment based upon length of service with such employer, in the industry or in the particular geographical area: Provided, That nothing in this subsection shall set aside the final proviso to subsection (a)(3): Provided further, That any agreement which would be invalid, but for clause (1) of this subsection, shall not be a bar to a petition filed pursuant to section 159(c) or 159(e) of this title.
(g) Notification of intention to strike or picket at any health care institution A labor organization before engaging in any strike, picketing, or other concerted refusal to work at any health care institution shall, not less than ten days prior to such action, notify the institution in writing and the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service of that intention, except that in the case of bargaining for an initial agreement following certification or recognition the notice required by this subsection shall not be given until the expiration of the period specified in clause (B) of the last sentence of subsection (d). The notice shall state the date and time that such action will commence. The notice, once given, may be extended by the written agreement of both parties. (July 5, 1935, ch. 372, §8, 49 Stat. 452 ; June 23, 1947, ch. 120, title I, §101, 61 Stat. 140 ; Oct. 22, 1951, ch. 534, §1(b), 65 Stat. 601 ; Pub. L. 86–257, title II, §201(e), title VII, §§704(a)–(c), 705(a), Sept. 14, 1959, 73 Stat. 525 , 542-545; Pub. L. 93–360, §1(c)–(e), July 26, 1974, 88 Stat. 395 , 396.)All element anchor links
- Covered employer — offsets [68:121]
- Covered employee and applicable retained status — offsets [126:174]
- Interference, restraint or coercion — offsets [126:174]
- Narrow insignia-restriction justification — offsets [126:174]
- Section 7 protected rights — offsets [194:244]
- Working-hours conference proviso — offsets [246:635]
- Domination, interference or support of a labor organization — offsets [250:384]
- Working-hours conference proviso — offsets [505:634]
- Conditional union-security proviso — offsets [636:2395]
- Employment discrimination — offsets [640:738]
- Same action absent unlawful motive — offsets [739:802]
- Union-related discriminatory motivation — offsets [739:802]
- Organization not established maintained or assisted through prohibited employer conduct — offsets [971:1082]
- Conditional union-security proviso — offsets [1083:1171]
- Ordinary thirty-day waiting period — offsets [1142:1278]
- Proper representative and no qualifying rescission — offsets [1280:1477]
- Proper representative and no qualifying rescission — offsets [1482:1825]
- Equal membership terms without disqualifying employer knowledge — offsets [1956:2129]
- Financial-only grounds without disqualifying employer knowledge — offsets [2133:2395]
- Discharge or other discrimination for Board participation — offsets [2400:2458]
- Filed charges or given testimony — offsets [2459:2528]
- Alternative breaches of applicable collective-bargaining duties — offsets [2534:2567]
- Bypassing the exclusive bargaining representative — offsets [2534:2567]
- Employees collective-bargaining representative — offsets [2568:2668]
- Noncoercive expression under §8(c) — offsets [9727:10055]
- Noncoercive expression under §8(c) — offsets [9974:10054]
- Failure of applicable meeting conference or agreement-execution duty — offsets [10056:10978]
- Failure of applicable meeting conference or agreement-execution duty — offsets [10253:10380]
- Breach of an applicable employer contract-modification notice duty — offsets [10979:11281]
- Breach of an applicable employer contract-modification notice duty — offsets [11282:11431]
- Breach of an applicable employer contract-modification notice duty — offsets [11432:11791]
- Breach of an applicable employer contract-modification notice duty — offsets [11792:13380]
- Covered employee and applicable retained status — offsets [12776:13232]
- Breach of an applicable employer health-care notice or participation duty — offsets [13381:13603]
- Breach of an applicable employer health-care notice or participation duty — offsets [13604:13859]
- Breach of an applicable employer health-care notice or participation duty — offsets [13860:14285]
- Conditional building-and-construction agreement allowance — offsets [15926:17666]
Element outline
- AND Covered employer
Coverage is cross-sectional; do not infer employee/employer status or commerce jurisdiction merely from a citation.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Covered employee and applicable retained status
Section 152(3) coverage and statutory status loss qualify employer unfair-labor-practice routes; section 158(d) specifies status loss for strikers within required notice periods and restoration on reemployment. Do not extend that strike language automatically to every picketer or every protected activity. The d(4) contract-notice status gate must include Mastro Plastics; do not apply it to every strike occurring during a pending contract-modification notice. Its qualification is not automatically extended to health-care section g or mixed-purpose strikes.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Univ. of S. Cal. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 918 F.3d 126 (2019) · Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia · 2019 — not reached · basis not recorded (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · rule-announced/merits · not counted
Pattern: managerial-employee exclusion of a university faculty subgroup (non-tenure-track faculty holding a minority of seats on governance committees) - AND Section 7 protected rights
Rights and concerted/protected character are defined outside §158(a), with judicial and Board interpretation.
3 merits instance blocks; 3 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) Unclassified route
provisional; provisional (1 case)no definition yet 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Local 702, Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 934 F.3d 590 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019 — not reached · basis not recorded (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/procedural · not counted
Pattern: not recordedconcerted-activity
provisional; 2 observed casesWhether the conduct is concerted activity for mutual aid or protection. 2
Satisfied 2; not satisfied 0; excluded context 02 Capital Med. Ctr. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 909 F.3d 427 (2018) · Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia · 2018 — satisfied · law (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: off-duty employees' stationary, non-obstructive holding of picket signs beside a hospital's non-emergency entranceSt. Paul Park Ref. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 929 F.3d 610 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: one employee's safety-stop refusal treated as the logical outgrowth of a same-day discussion of the same hazard with a coworkerstrike-misconduct
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether strike conduct loses the Act's protection. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Local 702, Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 934 F.3d 590 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2019 — not · law (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: strike-conduct/dangerous-highway-obstruction - AND Interference, restraint or coercion
Context governs interrogation; the Second Circuit rejected the challenged interrogation finding in Bozzuto. Do not treat any workplace union question as a violation.
7 merits instance blocks; 6 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) access-and-property-restrictions
provisional; 2 observed casesWhether excluding employees or organizers from property, or restricting their activity on it, interferes with § 7 rights (Republic Aviation, Lechmere). 3
Satisfied 2; not satisfied 1; excluded context 02 Capital Med. Ctr. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 909 F.3d 427 (2018) · Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia · 2018 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: hospital permits leafleting at the entrance but orders off-duty employees with picket signs off its property, threatens discipline and calls the policeNat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Imagefirst Unif. Rental Serv., Inc. — 910 F.3d 725 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018 — satisfied · conceded (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: manager demands that non-employee union leafleters leave the public shoulder of the road, over which the employer had no right to excludeNat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Imagefirst Unif. Rental Serv., Inc. — 910 F.3d 725 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2018 — not · no-evidence (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: employer threatens to call and calls the police on leafleters who keep stepping from the public shoulder onto its driveway; reasonable-concern ruleemployer-speech
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether an employer's campaign statement is a protected prediction or a threat (§ 8(c), Gissel). 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Hendrickson United States, LLC. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 932 F.3d 465 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — not · no-evidence (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: campaign-speech/from-scratch-prediction-in-contextinsignia-ban
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether a rule against union insignia or adornment interferes with § 7 rights. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 In-N-Out Burger, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 894 F.3d 707 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2018 — satisfied · law (29usc158: author: Astra4 · QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/wave2-cases-QA2-crosscheck.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: insignia/blanket-uniform-adornment-baninterrogation
provisional; 2 observed casesWhether questioning employees about union sympathies was coercive in context. 2
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 1; excluded context 02 Novato Healthcare Ctr. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 916 F.3d 1095 (2019) · Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia · 2019 — satisfied · law (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: supervisor-asks-vote-near-electionBozzuto's Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 927 F.3d 672 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2019 — not · no-evidence (29usc158: author: Astra4 · QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/wave2-cases-QA2-crosscheck.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: casual-general-question-to-open-supporter - EXCEPTION Noncoercive expression under §8(c)
Statutory speech protection; prediction versus threat is judicial elaboration. Hendrickson denied enforcement on its particular record, not immunity for all bargaining-from-scratch statements. Section 8(c) is an evidentiary as well as substantive protection throughout the subchapter, limited to noncoercive expression. It does not immunize discriminatory acts merely because they are explained in words.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- DEFENSE Narrow insignia-restriction justification
Judge/Board-made qualification to the employee insignia variant in In-N-Out (Fifth Circuit, 2018); not a universal defense. Public image and food safety were insufficient on that record.
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 In-N-Out Burger, Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 894 F.3d 707 (2018) · United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2018 — not · no-evidence (29usc158: author: Astra4 · QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/wave2-cases-QA2-crosscheck.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: image-and-safety/non-speculative-tailoring-absentpublic-image
provisional; 0 observed casesNot established merely by asserting a uniform brand image. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 00 Never used: no annotation uses in this snapshot safety
provisional; 0 observed casesRequires specific, nonspeculative support in the cited 2018 framework. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 00 Never used: no annotation uses in this snapshot - AND Domination, interference or support of a labor organization
These are alternative acts under §8(a)(2); the six sampled opinions do not resolve the doctrine of unlawful assistance versus cooperation. This block is a statutory baseline, not an inferred multi-factor test.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- EXCEPTION Working-hours conference proviso
Subject to Board rules; not an unrestricted safe harbor for employer domination or support. The complete proviso is conditional on Board rules under section 156. Conference during paid work time alone does not excuse domination, assistance or unrelated interference.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- EXCEPTION Conditional building-and-construction agreement allowance
Section f permits only making a qualifying construction agreement notwithstanding its listed majority-status, seven-day security, referral, or qualification/priority features. It does not excuse every discriminatory act by a construction employer. The final a(3) equal-membership/dues-only proviso survives, as does the statutory representation-petition proviso. The same financial-core and state-law limits must be assessed.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Employment discrimination
(formerly `variant adverse-action/discharge`) Disciplinary or discharge action under the sampled Wright Line analysis. Discharge is one variant; the statutory domain also includes hiring, tenure and other employment terms.
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 Novato Healthcare Ctr. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 916 F.3d 1095 (2019) · Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia · 2019 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: discharge/union-supporters-and-cover-discharge - AND Union-related discriminatory motivation
The General Counsel bears the initial persuasion burden. Employer knowledge, timing and animus can be evidence; these are not universal extra statutory elements. Group retaliation can reach workers without individual protected activity.
2 merits instance blocks; 2 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; 2 observed casesThe element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 2
Satisfied 2; not satisfied 0; excluded context 02 Erickson Trucking Serv., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 929 F.3d 393 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: workforce-retaliation/layoffs-reversible-if-union-backs-offSt. Paul Park Ref. Co. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 929 F.3d 610 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: suspension for a safety stop; motive inferred from discredited insubordination rationale, one-sided investigation and changing reasons - DEFENSE Same action absent unlawful motive
Judge/Board-made burden structure anchored to the purpose hook, not words of the statute. Applies only after the General Counsel proves the initial unlawful-motivation case.
4 merits instance blocks; 4 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; 4 observed casesThe element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 4
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 4; excluded context 04 Airgas USA, LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 916 F.3d 555 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — not · proved (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: employer's safety and prior-violation justifications for written discipline found pretextual; prior violation first invoked seven weeks laterNovato Healthcare Ctr. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 916 F.3d 1095 (2019) · Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia · 2019 — not · proved (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: credibility/discredited-sleeping-on-duty-accountErickson Trucking Serv., Inc. v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 929 F.3d 393 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — not · proved (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: business-rationale/past-crane-sales-without-discharges - EXCEPTION Conditional union-security proviso
The complete statutory provisos require proper representative status, no qualifying rescission election, and limits on exclusion or termination. §164(b) and judicial financial-core rules also matter; this is not blanket permission to compel full union membership. The full a(3) provisos are anchored above. This exception is true only when its conditions and section 164(b) state-law limits are satisfied; the separately modeled construction-agreement rule supplies the different seven-day route without removing the final a(3) safeguards. Marquez states the General Motors/Beck financial-core interpretation. The word membership does not authorize compulsory full membership or charges for non-germane activities over a proper objection; the existing statutory text is not rewritten.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Financial-only grounds without disqualifying employer knowledge
For the justification to apply, the employer must lack reasonable grounds that denial or termination was for a nonpayment-unrelated reason. This final a(3) safeguard survives section f expressly; assess financial obligations under Marquez/General Motors/Beck and applicable state law.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Equal membership terms without disqualifying employer knowledge
For the union-security justification to apply, the employer must lack the stated reasonable grounds that equal membership terms were unavailable. This is a condition on the exception, not permission to demand full union membership.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Organization not established maintained or assisted through prohibited employer conduct
Explicit threshold for the ordinary a(3) permission. A union-security clause cannot excuse employer domination or unlawful assistance. This condition was previously in the complete statutory quote and representation gloss; it now has its own stable node.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Proper representative and no qualifying rescission
Apply the unit, timing and election conditions; the union must also not be established, maintained or assisted by prohibited employer conduct.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Ordinary thirty-day waiting period
Ordinary a(3) route; section f supplies a different condition for qualified construction-industry agreements.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- AND Financial-only grounds without disqualifying employer knowledge
- AND Filed charges or given testimony
§8(a)(4) text baseline. The breadth of participation beyond literal hearing testimony requires interpretive authorities outside this six-case sample.
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 Airgas USA, LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 916 F.3d 555 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · conceded (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: truck driver with two pending NLRB charges against the employer, known to the disciplining manager - AND Discharge or other discrimination for Board participation
Read with the statutory because clause, not as a free-standing retaliation cause of action. The sample does not establish a separate §8(a)(4) burden rule.
1 merits instance blocks; 1 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _whole
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is decided as a whole: the reasoning turns on no narrower doctrinal sub-question that distinguishes it from any other application of this element. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 Airgas USA, LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 916 F.3d 555 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: written warning instead of the customary verbal warning for a load-securement lapse, one month after a charge; animus inferred from manager's discredited safety rationale, timing and disparate treatment - AND Employees collective-bargaining representative
§9(a) supplies the representational predicate and exclusivity; a claim cannot be inferred simply because negotiations occurred.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- OR Alternative breaches of applicable collective-bargaining duties
Includes the direct-dealing variant as described by the D.C. Circuit; the §8(d) duty does not compel substantive concession.
6 merits instance blocks; 5 distinct cases
Curated routes and observed case patterns Route Definition Merits instance blocks Distinct merits cases Examples (up to 3 cases per count group) _procedural
accepted; provisional (1 case)The element is only the occasion for a procedural ruling. 0
Satisfied 0; not satisfied 0; excluded context 10 Used only in non-merits blocks (1).
Excluded context examples:Watson v. Moeller Rubber Products, Inc. — 792 F. Supp. 1459 (1992) · United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi · 1992 — not reached · basis not recorded (29usc158: author: Astra4 · QA: PASS (QA2, neov2/qa/wave2-cases-QA2-crosscheck.md)) · background/procedural · not counted
Pattern: interim-relief/successor-recognition-disputedirect-dealing
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether the employer bypassed the union and dealt with employees directly. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. v. Ingredion Inc. — 930 F.3d 509 (2019) · Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia · 2019 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: soliciting-contract-preferences-outside-unioninformation-request
provisional; 2 observed casesWhether the employer unlawfully refused relevant information. 2
Satisfied 2; not satisfied 0; excluded context 02 National Labor Relations Board v. United States Postal Service — 841 F.2d 141 (1988) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1988 — satisfied · law (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: information/refusal-to-identify-potentially-conflicted-representativesDirectsat U.S. LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 925 F.3d 1272 (2019) · Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia · 2019 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: PASS (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: employer's bargaining proposal defines unit work by reference to a third-party agreement, then employer supplies only a redacted copysurface-bargaining
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether the employer's proposals and conduct show no intent to reach agreement. 1
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 0; excluded context 01 District Hospital Partners, L.P. v. NLRB — 141 F.4th 1279 (2025) · Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 2025 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Astra4 · not independently reviewed) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: no-strike-without-binding-arbitrationunilateral-change
provisional; provisional (1 case)Whether the employer changed terms and conditions unilaterally without bargaining to a valid impasse. 2
Satisfied 1; not satisfied 1; excluded context 01 Firstenergy Generation, LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 929 F.3d 321 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — not · law (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: one-off subcontracting of a nine-yearly turbine outage that the fully employed unit workforce could not complete within the 56-day window; not a mandatory subject of bargainingFirstenergy Generation, LLC v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd. — 929 F.3d 321 (2019) · United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2019 — satisfied · proved (29usc158: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) · applied/merits · counted
Pattern: after impasse employer implements elimination of retiree health benefits but not the wage increases it had offered as the quid pro quo- OR Breach of an applicable employer contract-modification notice duty
Applies when a party seeks to terminate or modify an existing collective-bargaining contract. The final paragraph expressly removes duties (2)-(4) after intervening certification/supersession, preserves fixed-term contractual limits, and states striker status consequences. Do not impose the full contract-modification checklist on every initial bargaining encounter. Mastro Plastics limits the d(4) status-loss consequence for strikes solely against employer unfair labor practices; keep that judicial limitation separate from the notice duties of a party actually seeking contract termination or modification.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- OR Bypassing the exclusive bargaining representative
The Ingredion rule pinned under the parent supplies this judicially elaborated route. Negotiating with represented individuals on bargaining subjects can establish this breach without independently proving every contract-notice or health-care condition.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- OR Failure of applicable meeting conference or agreement-execution duty
§8(d) defines the bargaining obligation. Unilateral changes, impasse, information requests and mandatory/permissive subject boundaries need further subcatalogues. The full d definition also covers agreement negotiation, questions arising under agreements, and execution of a written agreement if requested. These are express duties, not judicially invented elements.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- OR Breach of an applicable employer health-care notice or participation duty
Section d changes specified notice and contract periods for health-care institutions and provides a distinct initial-agreement mediation notice. Section g independently requires union strike/picketing notice; its trigger and exceptions are not ordinary employer bargaining elements.
0 merits instance blocks; 0 distinct cases
No routes recorded for this element.
- OR Breach of an applicable employer contract-modification notice duty