Per the syllabus, your readings for this week are Rainsberger XII, Understanding Labor Law chapter 5, and a journalistic article from December of 1996 (David Bacon, “The New Face of Unionbusting.”) As usual, your discussion is due by or before 6 PM on Saturday. But this is one of those modules (every 3rd one) where you have to do “double duty” by also writing a paper which is due 24 hours later – by or before 6 PM on Sunday. The paper is to be an answer to the question posed at the end of the overview introduction to the module.
Aside from the journalism piece, the readings for this module all concern the issue of ensuring that a labor organization (union) is a genuinely independent organization of the workers themselves, not a creature of the employer or unduly internally influenced by or in collusion with that employer. Both readings cover Section 8(a)(2) of the NLRA which states that it is illegal for an employer to dominate, interfere in the internal affairs of, or financially or otherwise support a union. Rainsberger’s reading also brings in Section 302 of the Act, which forbids things like kickbacks, bribes, and extortion. There also is a Section 8(b) provision forbidding union a union from interfering in the internal affairs of an employer by trying to coerce it into using (or not using) a particular individual to engage in its collective bargaining with the union.
In general, the idea of all of this is to maintain an “arm’s length” relationship between the two entities (employer and union) so that the union can fulfill its function of independently representing the interests of the workers it represents.
I think that all the readings are rather easy to follow and are quite clear. So, this overview will be shorter than most because the readings pretty much speak for themselves. I can point out the main issues you should know thoroughly by the end of this module:
(1) “Company unions” which are purely creations of the employer, and their use to combat genuine unions prior to the passage of the Wagner Act (NLRA). These are illegal as a result of Section 8(a)(2).
(2) The importance of defining what is a “labor organization” in deciding what violates 8(a)(2). The definition is given in Section 2(5). The key wording is “dealing with” an employer concerning workers’ conditions.
(3) The illegality of an employer favoring one union over another (this would be “interference.”)
(4) The illegality of an employer supporting a union financially (with exceptions needed for the orderly carrying out of the bargaining relationship between the two). Section 302 adds to the restrictions by specifically outlawing employer payments to financially benefit a union leader or representative (considered bribery, extortion, etc.).
(5) Section 302 also bans unions having more than 50% control over negotiated pension or trust funds that employers contribute to. The usual practice today for such funds is control by a board that is 50% union representatives and 50% employer representatives.
(6) Finally, there is the issue of modern worker participation groups or labor-management cooperation groups, and which ones are legal under Section 8(a)(2). As the readings should make apparent, there is a fine line that such groups or programs must observe if they are to be legal, although it does not seem to be all that difficult as long as they stay away from issues concerning employee conditions of work. The Understanding Labor Law reading also gives a more extensive discussion of the politics of this issue. Anti-union politicians and their allied forces have been attempting to modify Section 8(a)(2) to once again make company unions legal as long as they don’t officially engage in collective bargaining culminating in a signed contract. Legislation of this nature was vetoed by President Clinton in the 1990s. The issue continues to be a contentious one.
(7) The journalism piece by David Bacon (link is provided here in this module) covers the issues raised in the above, but also details many topics covered in the previous two modules. It is clearly an advocacy piece supportive of unions which subsumes all the tactics used by employers to resist unions under the concept of “unionbusting.” It provides a “real world” flavor to many of the dry legal concepts we have been covering in the last two modules. Read it with an eye to the many of its topics that you have been learning about in this course.
To complete this module you are to write a 2-5 page paper (due by or before 6 PM this coming Sunday) addressing the following question:
QUESTION:
David Bacon’s article “The New Face of Unionbusting” was written in December of 1996. It journalistically describes a number of situations that illustrate the real-world application of the laws we have been covering in the last two modules, at least from the author’s point of view.
In your paper I want you to identify every instance you can find in this article of potential violations of Section 8(a)(1) or 8(a)(3) or 8(a)(2). (Look for all instances.) Briefly explain why there is an issue under the relevant section in each case you identify. Finally, analyze his article from your own point of view: what does it say about the state of labor law in this country? (Clearly, Bacon writes as a union supporter, and you need not necessarily agree with him on this [although of course you can, if you share his viewpoint]. Whatever your stance on that, I do want to you make an argument and come to a conclusion about whether our labor law, as currently interpreted and implemented, is working well in its stated purpose of protecting the right of workers to freely join together, take concerted action, and form unions.)
Along with this website:
https://dbacon.igc.org/Unions/02ubust0.htm
Please use as ARGUMENT format.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]