By: Derek Hawkins//August 22, 2016//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: Amglo Kemlite Laboratories, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board
Case No.: 15-3695; 15-1141
Officials: BAUER and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and ADELMAN, District Judge
Focus: Retaliation
NLRB had reasonable basis to hold that employer improperly retaliated against employees to protesting low wages.
“Amglo does not challenge the Board’s finding that the strike was protected activity under the Act. So our review is only of the Board’s conclusion that Amglo violated the Act by transferring work from Illinois to Mexico for the unlawful purpose of retaliating against striking employees. See NLRB v. Washington Aluminum Co., 370 U.S. 9, 14–17 (1962) (employer cannot “punish a man by discharging him for engaging in concerted activities which § 7 of the Act protects”); St. Regis Paper Co., 247 NLRB 745, 745 (1980) (transferring work can constitute retaliation); Westpoint Transp., Inc., 222 NLRB 345, 352 (1976) (same). “We apply a deferential standard of review to the Board’s findings, looking only to see whether they are supported by substantial evidence. This means such relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support the conclusions of the Board. Our task is not to reweigh the evidence; it is only to determine whether there is evidence in the record supporting the Board’s outcome that could satisfy a reasonable fact finder.” AutoNation v. NLRB, 801 F.3d 767, 771 (7th Cir. 2015) (internal citations and quotation marks omitted). “We review the Board’s applications of the law to the facts and its interpretations of the Act deferentially as well, taking care to ensure that its legal conclusions have a reasonable basis in law.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted)”
Petition denied
Order Enforced