Display Mode
Dark
Dark
Light
Light
Theme Cover
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Search History
No search history
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Media
Term
Opinion Writer
Direction
Field

National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp.

• 1982 • 462 U.S. 393 • Burger Court
In the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp., 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The dispute arose when an employee was fired for union activities and filed a complaint with NLRB against his employer, Transportation Management Corporation (TMC). TMC argued that it had legitimate reasons to fire him unrelated to his union involvement. However, NLRB found that TMC's actions were motivated by anti-union...Open Case
Score:
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms
1 results found
Become a Sponsor
Support Us
Feedback: We can do better!

Your feedback is extremely important to us and greatly appreciated.
Tell us what went wrong

Copied to clipboard
StarredCase saved
Oh No!
Chief Burger Court
Term: 1982
Docket: 82-168
462 U.S. 393
103 S. Ct. 2469
76 L. Ed. 2d 667
1983 U.S. LEXIS 61
Argued: Mar 28, 1983

National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp.

  • Pro
  • Pro
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.

Opinion Summary
AI Abstract

In the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp., 1982, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The dispute arose when an employee was fired for union activities and filed a complaint with NLRB against his employer, Transportation Management Corporation (TMC). TMC argued that it had legitimate reasons to fire him unrelated to his union involvement. However, NLRB found that TMC's actions were motivated by anti-union sentiment and ordered reinstatement and backpay for the employee. On appeal, TMC contended that NLRB should have been required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt rather than just preponderance of evidence which is a lower standard of proof. The Supreme Court disagreed with this argument stating that administrative proceedings are not criminal trials hence do not require proof beyond reasonable doubt but can be decided on preponderance of evidence basis.

Dissent Summary
AI Abstract

In the dissenting opinion for the case of National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp., Justice Powell, joined by Chief Justice Burger and Justices Rehnquist and O'Connor, disagreed with the majority's interpretation of Section 8(a)(3) of the National Labor Relations Act. They argued that it was not enough to show that an employer’s anti-union animus contributed to a decision to fire an employee; instead, they believed it must be proven that without such bias, the termination would not have occurred. The dissenters contended this standard better aligned with Congress' intent in drafting Section 8(a)(3), which aimed at preventing employers from interfering with employees’ rights but also recognized legitimate reasons for firing or disciplining workers. They feared that under the majority's "motivating factor" test, employers might face unfair labor practice charges even when their actions were justified by substantial business reasons unrelated to union activities.

Opinion written by Justice BRWhite
Decided: Jun 13, 1983
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcript
Argued: Oct 05, 2026
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
AI Assist
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
PDF viewer is not available.
Oral Transcripts
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Related Cases
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Ask Etalia.ai
Go Pro!orto acess these features and extra content.
Audio of Oral Arguments
Free Trial!
Become a Sponsor

Support Us
Copyright © 2026Etalia.ai All Rights Reserved
  • Blog
  • •
  • Privacy
  • •
  • Terms