Phillip D. Bertelsen, Inc. v. Agricultural Labor Relations Board
California Court of Appeal
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
VARTABEDIAN, J.
Introduction
At the times relevant to this case, it was settled law under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) 1 and the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) 2 that nonagricultural workers were not entitled to remedial backpay during any period when they were not present in the United States. (Sure-Tan, Inc. v. NLRB (1984) 467 U.S. 883, 903 [81 L.Ed.2d 732, 750, 104 S.Ct. 2803].) (The NLRA does not apply to agricultural workers. (29 U.S.C. § 152(3).))
Prior to Sure-Tan, the immigration status of a worker made no difference in the available remedies under the NLRA.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- National Labor Relations Board v. Transportation Management Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Sure-Tan, Inc. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Hacienda HotelCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1989
- In Re KellyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1983
- Mendoza v. Wight Vineyard ManagementCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1986
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Cook v. State Farm General Insurance CompanyDistrict Court, N.D. California · 2021