Laro Maintenance Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
56 F.3d 224 (1995)
When Laro (plaintiff) won a maintenance contract replacing Prompt, it hired only 10 of Prompt's 23 unionized Local 32B employees, refusing to even interview the other 13 and replacing them with less-qualified workers, while shifting other employees between sites to alter union representation; Laro then negotiated a new contract with Local 355, which represented only a minority of the workers there, instead of Local 32B. An ALJ found Laro's hiring practices designed to undercut Local 32B in violation of the NLRA, the NLRB ordered relief, and Laro petitioned for review.
Whether an administrative law judge's findings of fact will be disturbed on appeal if the findings are reasonable and supported by substantial evidence.