context: Further, the room assignment requirement was not de minimis -- it materially and significantly affected the terms and conditions of employment of the housekeepers by increasing the number of rooms they may need to clean on a given day.
citation_a.signal: see
citation_a.identifier: 2011 WL 2414720, at *6
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that the number of rooms that housekeepers must clean is a mandatory subject of bargaining
citation_a.sentence: See HTH, 2011 WL 2414720, at *6 (holding that the number of rooms that housekeepers must clean is a mandatory subject of bargaining); see also EAD Motors E. Air Devices, Inc., 346 NLRB 1060, 1065 (2006) (“[T]he Board has made clear that in order to constitute a unilateral change that violates the Act, an employer’s action must effect a material, substantial, and significant change in terms or conditions of employment.”); Seattle First Nat’l Bank v. NLRB, 444 F.2d 30, 33 (9th Cir.1971) (“A mere remote, indirect or incidental impact is not sufficient.”).
citation_b.signal: see also
citation_b.identifier: 444 F.2d 30, 33
citation_b.parenthetical: "A mere remote, indirect or incidental impact is not sufficient."
citation_b.sentence: See HTH, 2011 WL 2414720, at *6 (holding that the number of rooms that housekeepers must clean is a mandatory subject of bargaining); see also EAD Motors E. Air Devices, Inc., 346 NLRB 1060, 1065 (2006) (“[T]he Board has made clear that in order to constitute a unilateral change that violates the Act, an employer’s action must effect a material, substantial, and significant change in terms or conditions of employment.”); Seattle First Nat’l Bank v. NLRB, 444 F.2d 30, 33 (9th Cir.1971) (“A mere remote, indirect or incidental impact is not sufficient.”).