The Representative Free Decision Act

Case 5-3, "Did the Company Violate....?", p. 232; and Case 5-5, "Bulletin Board Use", p. 236. Answer the questions at the end of each case in typewritten format, 3 - 5 pages.

In 1947 it was revised to help better protect employees as well as employers. The revision stated that employees and managers must bargain “in good faith” with each other, and illegalized wild cat strikes, (refusing to work under a valid contract). These rights help employees as well as employers to be treated fairly. Forcing employees and employers to work together as a team can increase their understanding of where each side is coming from, as well as making it easier to compromise. The act also prevented businesses from becoming “closed shops,” (places where only union members were hired.) and prevented members from forcing others to join a union. Employees were also given the option to hold elections to certify and decertify unions. Employers were given the freedom to voice any concerns they had over unions so long as they did not interfere with the organization of unions. The revised act also gives the president the power to call off strikes in the event that it becomes a national emergency. A board may be hired to examine the situation of the strike so that the president may better understand why the situation has not been resolved. The president can then put an injunction on the strike; if a decision is not reached, the injunction can be extended.

Labor unions represent workers interests and the collective bargaining process provides a way to manage the conflict (Noe, 2003). More than ever, union employees have come to see unionizing as a way to achieve an

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), also known as the Wagner Act, was enacted in Congress in 1935 and became one of the most important legacies of the New Deal. Prior to the passage of the NLRA, employers had been free to spy on, interrogate, discipline, discharge, and blacklist union members. Reversing years of federal opposition, the statute guaranteed the right of employees to organize labor unions, to engage in collective bargaining, and to take part in strikes. The act also created a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) to arbitrate deadlocked labor-management disputes, guarantee democratic union elections, and penalize unfair labor practices by employers. The law applied to all employees involved in the interstate

Thesis: The Lakeside Packers case demonstrates that the province of Alberta requires the Labour Code to be amended to allow for First Contract Arbitration in the Collective Bargaining Process.

29 U.S.C. §§ 151-169 (2015). The NLRA enables workers to engage in concerted action free from employer coercion, retaliation, and to bargain collectively with their employer. Id. See also Richard B. Freeman, What Can We Learn from the NLRA to Create Labor Law for the Twenty-First Century? 26 ABA J. LAB. & EMP. L. 327, 327 (2010). Freeman notes that “[t]he NLRA intended to replace the costly organizational fights that historically marred U.S. labor relations with a ‘laboratory conditions’ electoral process . . . .” Id. It also was meant to bolster the economy, facilitate labor peace, and create more jobs. Id.

Facts: In Davis Supermarkets, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board 2 F.3d 1162 (DC. Cir. 1993), the Court was asked to decide a dispute between an employer (Davis) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB had found that Davis committed unfair labor practices, which Davis disputed. A union (Local 23) was attempting to organize a local at Davis. Several employees signed authorization cards for the union. Six of those employees were terminated in a mass layoff that impacted eight employees. Davis then fired or constructively fired three more employees who had filed authorization cards. Davis's chairman of the board then informed employees that he wanted them to sign authorizations with the Steelworkers, a competing union. However, Davis maintained that the employees were terminated for cause, not because they signed authorization cards for Local 23.

The National Labor Relations Act seeks to promote collective bargaining to resolve employer and employee concerns. Because many agreements between labor and management sometimes affect and/or restrain competition under the context of the Sherman Act of 1890, a

3. If you were a member of the NLRB, how would you rule in this case and why?

The NLRB and the courts have interpreted this statutory provision to mean that employees ( both union and non-unions members ) have the right to act together and discuss the terms and conditions of employment with fellow employees, to

The Court held an employer could not be compelled by the Act to do so if other channels of communication are available that allows the union to reach the employees, provided that the employer does not discriminate against the union by allowing other distributions. The Supreme Court stated that so long as the circumstances of the employment do not "place the employees beyond the reach of reasonable union efforts to communicate with them," respect for the employer 's property rights allow it to prohibit nonemployee access to its property. In doing so, the Court specifically differentiated the access rights of employees from those of nonemployees. The distinction [between employees and nonemployees] is one of substance. No restriction may be placed on the employees ' right to discuss self-organization among themselves unless the employer can demonstrate that a restriction is necessary to maintain production or discipline. Republic Aviation Corp. v. Labor Board, 324 U.S. 793, 803. But no such obligation is owed nonemployee organizers.” Ted Scott and Sara B. Kalis, Littler Mendelson, P.C.1.

The National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) started in July 1935 to protect the rights of employees, rather, they be union or nor-union employees (Pozgar, 2012). The employees are protected under the Act or may employ in bubble-like, rigorous goings-on in situations other than the customary union organizations and cooperative bargaining. The National Labor Relations Board regulates the employers from interfering with the rights of the employees to implement or organize and join with a groups that offers assists with collective bargaining purposes like organization union or joining one (Pozgar, 2012). The employer may not restrain, coerce or stop employees

In the U.S. labor relations, a group of employees who desire to bargain collectively rather than individually, are those who typically form a union (Dooley, 1957). This demonstrates to the employer that the majority of its employees support the union and the organizing process begins. First, employees cannot form a union without abiding by certain basic procedural steps and legal standards that are required. Decisions to vote against or for a union are based on factors such as satisfaction with their job, beliefs of the effectiveness of the union, and the culture or social environment in which the employee works. Next, when an employer exerts undue punishment to an employee who the employer suspects as being an illegal alien, this may be poor public policy. From a legal perspective, a recent federal court case, Singh v. Jutla & C.D. & R. Oil, Inc., 214 F. Supp. 2d 1056 (N.D. Cal. 2002) spoke to this issue. In this case, when the plaintiff Singh filed a wage claim under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the employer fired him and reported him to INS as an illegal alien (Labor Law, 1969). Likewise, the union certification process which was established by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) in 1935 was a victory for workers waning union representation upon its initial implementation. Workers could petition the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for a determination made democratically of whether a majority of workers favored unionization (Labor Law, 1969). This effort

The National Labor Relations Act was enacted by congress in 1935 in order to define and defend the rights of the employment relationship. The act allows employees of a company the right to form a union and have the union organization represent them through collective bargaining. Collective bargaining is the process of negotiation between both parties; Union representatives and a corporation, with the purpose of reaching an agreement for the best interests of employees and the corporation. In the negotiation process the attempt is to establish primary factors of importance which are advantages the union fights for and ultimately provide for its stakeholders that would otherwise not have

Occasionally disagreements do occur, and in these cases the union may decide to take industrial action. If the problem cannot be resolved amicably, the matter may go to an industrial tribunal. The purpose of industrial tribunals is to make sure that employee and employers conform to employment laws. They are made up of people outside the workplace who make a judgment about the case, based on the employees and employers point of view. Cases that go to industrial tribunals are usually about pay, unfair dismissal, redundancy or discrimination at work. The Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service (ACAS) is often used to help find a solution to a dispute, which is acceptable to both sides. Its duty under the Employment Protection Act is to promote the improvement of industrial relations and in particular to encourage the extension of collective bargaining and also to develop collective bargaining machinery (Mclean, 2007). Its main functions are: advisory work, collective conciliation, individual conciliation, arbitration, and extended investigation into industrial relations problems.