Not a government sitenlrb.fyi is an independent project. It is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or operated by the National Labor Relations Board or any government agency. The Board's own site is at nlrb.gov.

AT&T Mobility

556 cases in this site's copy of the record · 9 of those 556 are marked open by the Board · Region 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 09, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 27, 28, 29, 31, 32 · ASHLAND, KY; Aberdeen, NC; Abilene, TX; Albany, NY; Albemarle, NC; Albuquerque, NM and more

Each case links to the Board's own docket page. This site holds what the Board listed, not the documents.

What kinds of case

Type	What it is	Here
CA	Charge against an employer	545
RC	Petition for an election	7
RD	Petition to decertify	4

The cases

Page 3 of 4, newest first: 1 2 3 4

AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 27 January 2015Case 09-CA-145189ClosedCLARKSVILLE, INRegion 09Workers in the unit 50
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 8 January 2015Case 25-CA-144021ClosedColumbus, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 6
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 January 2015Case 15-CA-143965ClosedJackson, TNRegion 15Workers in the unit 30
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 January 2015Case 12-CA-143951ClosedOviedo, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 12
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 23 December 2014Case 16-CA-143432ClosedWeatherford, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 5,000
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 1 December 2014Case 18-CA-141850ClosedRAPID CITY, SDRegion 18Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 21 October 2014Case 12-CA-139225ClosedOrlando, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 800
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 October 2014Case 16-CA-138031ClosedWeatherford, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 5,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 September 2014Case 32-CA-136465ClosedBrentwood, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 25 August 2014Case 10-CA-135318ClosedLebanon, VARegion 10Workers in the unit 20,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 30 July 2014Case 20-CA-133843ClosedSan Ramon, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 56,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 July 2014Case 14-CA-131922ClosedTopeka, KSRegion 14Workers in the unit 20
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 June 2014Case 14-CA-131268ClosedOklahoma City, OKRegion 14Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 17 June 2014Case 14-CA-130934ClosedOklahoma City, OKRegion 14Workers in the unit 500
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 30 April 2014Case 09-CA-127697ClosedCHARLESTON, WVRegion 09Workers in the unit 250
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 April 2014Case 10-CA-126491ClosedPaducah, KYRegion 10Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 April 2014Case 10-CA-126481ClosedPaducah, KYRegion 10Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 April 2014Case 14-CA-125691ClosedOklahoma City, OKRegion 14Workers in the unit 150
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 April 2014Case 14-CA-125690ClosedOklahoma City, OKRegion 14Workers in the unit 150
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 31 March 2014Case 09-CA-125574ClosedHURRICANE, WVRegion 09Workers in the unit 70
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 17 March 2014Case 14-CA-124635ClosedOklahoma City, OKRegion 14Workers in the unit 115
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 17 March 2014Case 14-CA-124630ClosedOklahoma City, OKRegion 14Workers in the unit 500
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 5 March 2014Case 27-CA-123850ClosedSalt Lake City, UTRegion 27Workers in the unit 14
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 24 February 2014Case 10-CA-123114ClosedAlpharetta, GARegion 10Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 5 February 2014Case 19-CA-122012ClosedTualatin, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 20
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 30 December 2013Case 01-CA-119817ClosedMANCHESTER, NHRegion 01Workers in the unit 125
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 4 December 2013Case 14-CA-118337ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 25 November 2013Case 19-CA-117867ClosedSeattle, WARegion 19Workers in the unit 10
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 15 November 2013Case 25-CA-117069ClosedDavenport, IARegion 25Workers in the unit 300
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 October 2013Case 19-CA-115700ClosedPortland, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 15
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 28 October 2013Case 10-CA-115828ClosedColumbia, SCRegion 10Workers in the unit 130
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 30 September 2013Case 10-CA-114424ClosedCOLUMBIA, SCRegion 10Workers in the unit 40
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 24 September 2013Case 12-CA-114058ClosedLake Mary, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 2
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 September 2013Case 14-CA-112843ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 September 2013Case 14-CA-112844ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 September 2013Case 14-CA-112842ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 September 2013Case 14-CA-112840ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 September 2013Case 14-CA-112839ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 3 September 2013Case 14-CA-112552ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 150
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 August 2013Case 14-CA-112164ClosedSpringfield, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 28
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 23 August 2013Case 19-CA-111870ClosedTigard, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 August 2013Case 12-CA-111619ClosedOrlando, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 2,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 August 2013Case 12-CA-111618ClosedOrlando, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 2,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 5 August 2013Case 15-CA-110664ClosedMemphis, TNRegion 15Workers in the unit 500
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 1 August 2013Case 24-CA-110330ClosedGuaynabo, PRRegion 12Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 July 2013Case 12-CA-109383ClosedLake Mary, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 June 2013Case 27-CA-107465ClosedLone Tree, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 9
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 June 2013Case 27-CA-107464ClosedEnglewood, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 10
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 11 June 2013Case 14-CA-106904ClosedManhattan, KSRegion 14Workers in the unit 10
AT & T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 15 May 2013Case 10-CA-105190ClosedRaleigh, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 60
AT & T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 15 May 2013Case 10-CA-105187ClosedRaleigh, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 60
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 May 2013Case 12-CA-104367ClosedOrlando, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 2
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 26 April 2013Case 12-CA-103754ClosedMIAMI, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 26 April 2013Case 01-CA-103830ClosedFramingham, MARegion 01Workers in the unit 50,000
AT&T MOBILITY
RC
Filed 16 April 2013Case 24-RC-102961ClosedGUAYNABO, PRRegion 12Workers in the unit 6
Included: All regular full-time and regular part-time associate inventory administrators/supply chain operators who work for the Employer at its facilities located in Catano, Puerto Rico. Excluded: All other employees, guards and supervisors as defined by the Act.
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 April 2013Case 14-CA-102946ClosedSpringfield, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 35
AT & T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 25 March 2013Case 12-CA-101003ClosedMIAMI, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
At&t Mobility
CA
Filed 4 March 2013Case 27-CA-099652ClosedAurora, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 7
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 25 February 2013Case 03-CA-098919ClosedJamestown, NYRegion 03Workers in the unit 14
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 20 February 2013Case 12-CA-098642ClosedMIAMI, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 12 February 2013Case 14-CA-098217ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 12 February 2013Case 14-CA-098216ClosedManhattan, KSRegion 14Workers in the unit 10
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 12 February 2013Case 14-CA-098215ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 12 February 2013Case 14-CA-098213ClosedManhattan, KSRegion 14Workers in the unit 10
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 February 2013Case 27-CA-097907ClosedPueblo, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 470
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 December 2012Case 14-CA-095278ClosedJoplin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 30
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 November 2012Case 27-CA-093367ClosedDenver, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 7
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 10 September 2012Case 25-CA-088862ClosedMISHAWAKA, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 480
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 August 2012Case 14-CA-088347ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 200
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 18 July 2012Case 22-CA-085612ClosedPARAMUS, NJRegion 22Workers in the unit 1,800
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 5 July 2012Case 14-CA-084609ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 5,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 June 2012Case 13-CA-084171ClosedAlgonquin, ILRegion 13Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 25 June 2012Case 14-CA-083919ClosedSaint Louis, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 5,000
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 4 May 2012Case 25-CA-080281ClosedELKHART, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 7
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 March 2012Case 30-CA-077734ClosedMarquette, MIRegion 18Workers in the unit 15
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 March 2012Case 19-CA-077632ClosedWilsonville, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 10
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 22 March 2012Case 09-CA-077125ClosedASHLAND, KYRegion 09Workers in the unit 450
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 March 2012Case 26-CA-076720ClosedHopkinsville, KYRegion 15Workers in the unit 20
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 14 March 2012Case 20-CA-076712ClosedHonolulu, HIRegion 20Workers in the unit 100
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 8 March 2012Case 09-CA-076125ClosedGRAYSON, KYRegion 09Workers in the unit 450
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 7 March 2012Case 34-CA-076106ClosedMiddletown, CTRegion 01Workers in the unit 850
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 6 March 2012Case 24-CA-076042ClosedGuaynabo, PRRegion 12Workers in the unit 60
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 March 2012Case 14-CA-075762ClosedWashington, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 10,000
AT & T Mobility
RC
Filed 28 February 2012Case 24-RC-075392ClosedGuaynabo, PRRegion 12Workers in the unit 11
Included: All full-time and part-time retail employees,l sales consultants, and sales support employees employed by the Employer at its St. Croix facility. Excluded: All other employees, guards, and supervisors as defined in the Act.
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 February 2012Case 16-CA-075602ClosedAustin, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 10,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 24 February 2012Case 17-CA-075259ClosedSaint Joseph, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 10,000
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 22 February 2012Case 25-CA-075011ClosedEvansville, INRegion 25Workers in the unit 13
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 February 2012Case 19-CA-074331ClosedTualatin, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 30 January 2012Case 10-CA-073368ClosedBirmingham, ALRegion 10Workers in the unit 25
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 December 2011Case 26-CA-071546ClosedPaducah, KYRegion 15Workers in the unit 20
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 November 2011Case 12-CA-067935ClosedMiami, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 27 October 2011Case 27-CA-067704ClosedLone Tree, CORegion 27Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 11 October 2011Case 28-CA-066511ClosedAlbuquerque, NMRegion 28Workers in the unit 10
Petition for an election
RC
Filed 16 September 2011Case 24-RC-064647ClosedSaint John, VIRegion 12Workers in the unit 11
Included All full time and part time retail employees, sales consultants, and sales support employees employed by the Employer at its St. Croix facility. Excluded All other employees, guards and supervisors as defined in the Act.
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 8 September 2011Case 19-CA-033246ClosedIssaquah, WARegion 19Workers in the unit 10
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 September 2011Case 20-CA-064068ClosedSan Rafael, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 20
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 31 August 2011Case 11-CA-063671ClosedAlbemarle, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 50
AT & T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 30 August 2011Case 22-CA-063755ClosedPARAMUS, NJRegion 22Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 26 August 2011Case 26-CA-063390ClosedLittle Rock, ARRegion 15Workers in the unit 70
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 23 August 2011Case 28-CA-063170ClosedAlbuquerque, NMRegion 28Workers in the unit 5
AT& T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 19 August 2011Case 09-CA-063061ClosedGRAYSON, KYRegion 09Workers in the unit 400
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 11 August 2011Case 19-CA-033203ClosedIssaquah, WARegion 19Workers in the unit 21,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 August 2011Case 24-CA-062408ClosedSan Juan, PRRegion 12Workers in the unit 1,300
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 3 August 2011Case 21-CA-039904ClosedSan Diego, CARegion 21Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 July 2011Case 18-CA-061552ClosedMinneapolis, MNRegion 18Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 8 July 2011Case 24-CA-011892ClosedSan Juan, PRRegion 12Workers in the unit 100
AT&T MOBILITY
CA
Filed 23 June 2011Case 11-CA-023156ClosedAlbemarle, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 10
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 May 2011Case 11-CA-023117ClosedAlbemarle, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 10
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 May 2011Case 07-CA-053710ClosedAlbemarle, NCRegion 07Workers in the unit 10
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 19 May 2011Case 17-CA-025150ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 14Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 19 May 2011Case 11-CA-023116ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 May 2011Case 26-CA-024026ClosedLittle Rock, ARRegion 15Workers in the unit 70
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 4 May 2011Case 16-CA-028011ClosedAbilene, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 30
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 20 April 2011Case 16-CA-027985ClosedFarmers Branch, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 April 2011Case 16-CA-027981ClosedAbilene, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 30
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 17 March 2011Case 16-CA-027926ClosedSan Antonio, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 20
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 24 February 2011Case 16-CA-027896ClosedFarmers Branch, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 1
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 February 2011Case 20-CA-035430ClosedSan Rafael, CARegion 20Workers in the unit 62,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 February 2011Case 17-CA-025077ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 14Workers in the unit 420
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 February 2011Case 17-CA-025076ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 14Workers in the unit 420
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 February 2011Case 12-CA-027047ClosedTampa, FLRegion 12Workers in the unit 8
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 February 2011Case 11-CA-022983ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 420
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 February 2011Case 11-CA-022982ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 420
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 10 February 2011Case 11-CA-022981ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 420
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 7 January 2011Case 10-CA-038769ClosedBirmingham, ALRegion 10Workers in the unit 45,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 December 2010Case 17-CA-025047ClosedOklahoma City, OKRegion 14Workers in the unit 1,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 16 December 2010Case 17-CA-025038ClosedSpringfield, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 20
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 December 2010Case 06-CA-037178ClosedMorgantown, WVRegion 06Workers in the unit 10,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 9 December 2010Case 34-CA-012869ClosedHartford, CTRegion 01Workers in the unit 850
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 23 November 2010Case 26-CA-023912ClosedMemphis, TNRegion 15Workers in the unit 250
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 27 October 2010Case 11-CA-022856ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 200
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 27 October 2010Case 10-CA-038668ClosedBirmingham, ALRegion 10Workers in the unit 100
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 October 2010Case 05-CA-036192ClosedBirmingham, ALRegion 05Workers in the unit 45,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 19 October 2010Case 17-CA-024990ClosedJoplin, MORegion 14Workers in the unit 500
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 October 2010Case 06-CA-037122ClosedAltoona, PARegion 06Workers in the unit 191
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 22 September 2010Case 04-CA-037706ClosedHarrisburg, PARegion 04Workers in the unit 191
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 13 September 2010Case 28-CA-023177ClosedAlbuquerque, NMRegion 28Workers in the unit 70
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 18 August 2010Case 32-CA-025320ClosedPleasanton, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 1,000
AT & T Mobility
CA
Filed 12 July 2010Case 16-CA-027535ClosedPlano, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 June 2010Case 17-CA-024873ClosedOverland Park, KSRegion 14Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 June 2010Case 11-CA-022724ClosedGreensboro, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 850
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 14 June 2010Case 06-CA-036983ClosedTriadelphia, WVRegion 06Workers in the unit 200
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 May 2010Case 16-CA-027450ClosedLubbock, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 7,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 28 May 2010Case 16-CA-027449ClosedLubbock, TXRegion 16Workers in the unit 7,000
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 21 May 2010Case 32-CA-025115ClosedAtwater, CARegion 32Workers in the unit 50
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 29 April 2010Case 19-CA-032513ClosedRedmond, WARegion 19Workers in the unit 140
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 April 2010Case 11-CA-022643ClosedFayetteville, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 10
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 13 April 2010Case 11-CA-022642ClosedAberdeen, NCRegion 10Workers in the unit 10
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 8 April 2010Case 36-CA-010640ClosedMedford, ORRegion 19Workers in the unit 40
Charge against an employer
CA
Filed 1 April 2010Case 05-CA-035691ClosedWashington, DCRegion 05Workers in the unit 45,000

Page 3 of 4, newest first: 1 2 3 4

Last refreshed 19 September 2026. What is in it, and what is not.

The Labor Board FYI is independent, and is not the Board or any government agency. Where a number here disagrees with the Board's, the Board is right: tell us at [email protected]. If a name here is a private person and not a business or a union, write to the same address and it comes off. Where this comes from.