Term
|
Definition
| EEs shal have the right to form, join, assit labor org, to bargain collectively, and to engage in concerted activities for the purpose of mutual aid and protection |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| it is a ULP for ER to interfere with, restrain, or coerce EEs in the exercise of their right guaranteed in section 7 |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| dissuades ERs from working with unions ? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| violation of section 7 by discrimination in regard to hire, tenure, or any term or condition of employment that would discourage union membership |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| violation of section 7 by refusing to bargain collectively to the provisions such as 9a |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| ULP for a labor organization or its agents to refuse to bargain collectively with an ER, providing it is the representative of his EEs (converse to 8a5) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
free speech defense
the expressing... shall not constitute or be evidence of a ULP under any provision of this act, if such expression contains no threat of reprisal or force or promise of benefit |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| obligation to bargain collectively, meet at reasonable times and cofer in good faith with respect to wages, hours, and other terms/conditions of employment |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. broad legalization program
2. increased border enforcement
3. workplace regulation (I9 form, restricts knowingly hiring illegals) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. cease and desist from extending or entering violation into new contract
2. cease and desist from refusing to bargain and from entering w/ employees
3. required posted notice |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. backpay
2. promotion
3. reinstatement
4. attorney fees
5. other actions that will make individual "whole"
6. compensatory and punitive damages in cases of international discrimination |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
covered
- interstate commerce
- specified employees
- er/ee relationship required
not covered
domestic workers
agricultural workers
supervisors |
|
|
Term
| 3 ways for union representation |
|
Definition
1. election for the union (NLRB supervised)
requires substantial showing of interest, 30%
2. bargaining order (rare)
3. employer can voluntary recognition (auth cards)
if signed by the majority of ees, the er can
-accept majority
-ask for an actual election (unless he has other knowledge that there is a majority in favor) |
|
|
Term
nlrb v city disposal systems
issue |
|
Definition
| whether brown's honest and reasonable assertion of his right to be free of the obligation to drive unsafe trucks constituted "concerted activity" within the meaning of section 7. |
|
|
Term
nlrb v city disposal systems
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. the individuals assertion of a right in a cba is an extension of the concerted action that produced the agreement
2. the assertion of such a right affects the rights of all ees covered by the cba
3. brown honestly and reasonably beleived he was being asked to violate the cba
4. brown does not have to explicitly make mention of the cba
5. it would go against the protections of the act to not allow this protection under section 7 |
|
|
Term
nlrb v city disposal systems
dissent |
|
Definition
1. action grounded in a cba is not enough to justify concerted activity. otherwise, every contract claim could justify a ULP
2. requiring multiple members to take art in concerted activity makes for better claims
3. an individual should seek support form other ees to defend the cba
4. this was for personal benefit!
5. allowing all complains about cba count as ULP gives too much power to the board |
|
|
Term
nlrb v washington aluminum
question |
|
Definition
| is the peaceful walkout defined as a concered activity and covered under section 7 when the employees did not have a collective bargaining agreement or union representation or did the er violation 8a1? |
|
|
Term
nlrb v washington aluminum
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. ees action was reasonable/proportional to circumstances
2. labor law does not equal union law- you can be protected without having a union
3. there was a presence of a genuine labor dispute previously, so the ees could act
4.issue of working conditions arose from a prior complaint, this qualifies as a genuine labor dispute
5. section 7 is broad enough to protect the action, requiring a specific demand puts too much burden on the EEs |
|
|
Term
nlrb v washington aluminum
legal principle |
|
Definition
| section 7 does not require a specific demand be made for concerted activity. the language is broad enough to protect concerted activities whether they take place before, after, or at the same time such a demand is made. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| is it a 8a1 violation for the er to not allow the distribution of a newsletter unrelated to the er and his ees? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
1. it was about the betterment of workers nationwide, and they are protected
2. labor pushes for change which is beyond the immediate ee/er relationship
3.mutual aid and protection is much broader than saying terms and conditions of employment, so the protection is very broad (but must related to one's interests as an ee) |
|
|
Term
timekeeping systems inc
question |
|
Definition
whether respondent discharged leinweber because of protected concerted activities and violated section 8a1.
"was the language so violent or of such serioius character as to render the ee unfit for further service? |
|
|
Term
timekeeping inc,
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. it is concerted
-purpose was to better inform other ees
-er letter established his anger with ees attempts to enlist others
2. it was protected
-language was not so serious as to render the ee unfit for further service
-wasn't as bad as boorish, ill-bred and hostile, and even that was protected |
|
|
Term
jefferson standard broadcasting company
legal principle |
|
Definition
| 1. ee conduct disparaging the er's business may be protected concerted activity if the disparagement relates to labor relations or workign conditions and is not too extreme |
|
|
Term
nlrb v transportation management corp
question |
|
Definition
| did the ee's termination constitute an 8a3/8a1 violation? |
|
|
Term
nlrb v transportation management corp
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. supervisor didn't find out about the keys left in the bus until after the ee was fired, and it wasn't uncommon to leave keys in the bus
2. the driver was not warned about his breaks, although the er had a 3 strike rule
3. breaks didn't disrupt work |
|
|
Term
nlrb v transportation management corp
legal principle, same decision defense |
|
Definition
Ps initial burden: show union animus as a substantial or motivating factor
D's burden: shos that he would have made the same decisions regardless of discrimination
(limits the remedies, not liability) |
|
|
Term
town and country electric v nlrb
question |
|
Definition
1. was the company's failure to interview other applicants an 8a3(/8a1) violation
2. was malcolm's firing an 8a3/8a1 violation? |
|
|
Term
town and country electric v nlrb
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. er terminated interviews only after learning that applicants were union
2. prima facie case
-p: termination of employment was motivated by union animus
-d:poor worker and failed to perform in a craftsman like manner, plus he caused low morale
-c: failure to show that he would have been fired anyways even though he wasn't a model employee |
|
|
Term
town and country electric v nlrb
legal principle |
|
Definition
1. it is discrimination for an er to fail to hire someone just because that ee intends to unionize the workplace
2. prima facie case implementation (from transportation management corp) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| under the nlra is it an 8a1 violation for lechmere to have a no solicitation policy that applies to all non-ees on his private property? |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
pre jean country test
1. are ees beyond the reach of reasonable union efforts to communicate with them?
-if not, er can exclude without an 8a1 violation
-if yes, then balance er private property interest with ee section 7 interest (jean country test) |
|
|
Term
lechmere v nlrb
legal principle |
|
Definition
union access principles (8a1 balance with property rights)
-if ees, use jean country
-if non ees, show that they unreachable, then use jean country |
|
|
Term
valid or invalid?
ees cannot solicit in work areas during non work time |
|
Definition
invalid,
exception if er can show that there are special circumstances that relate to production or discipline that require the rule |
|
|
Term
valid or invalid?
ees cannot solicit in work areas during work time |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
valid or invalid?
ees cannot distribute literature in work areas during non work time |
|
Definition
| valid, literature -> trash |
|
|
Term
valid or invalid?
ees must secure er permission before distributing literature in non work areas during non work time |
|
Definition
invalid,
exception if er has a good reason |
|
|
Term
valid or invalid?
non ees cannot solicit on er property at any time |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
nlrb v gissel packing co
question |
|
Definition
| whether certain specific statements made by an er to his ees constituted such an election, voiding ULP and thus feel outside the protection of the first amendment and section 8c of nlra |
|
|
Term
nlrb v gissel packing co
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. statue restricts expression that is intended to restrain or coerce
2. information was not based on objective facts
-er assumed that teamsters would go on strike
-picture of graves
3. er speech rights can't outweigh the ees rights of association
4. balancing of rights must account for inequality of bargaining power. ees are sensitive to er's information because they are financially dependent on the er |
|
|
Term
nlrb v gissel packing co
legal principle |
|
Definition
1. er is free to communication union views as long as they don't threaten or promise benefit
2. may even make a prediction as the the precise effects
3. but must be carefully phrased for objective facts. |
|
|
Term
nlrb v exchange parts
question |
|
Definition
| was the announcement of the birthday holiday, grant, overtime, and vacation benefits a violation of 8a1 by inducing the ees to vote against the union or was it protected by 8c? |
|
|
Term
nlrb v exchange parts co
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. ers statements interfered with, restrained, or coerced ee in the exercise of section 7 rights
3. fist inside the velvet glove |
|
|
Term
nlrb v exchange parts co
legal principle |
|
Definition
| after hearing about the union, er can inform of past benefits, but cannot offer new ones |
|
|
Term
nlrb v insurance agents international union
question |
|
Definition
| does the unions behavior of harassing the business violate 8b3 requirement for good faith bargaining? |
|
|
Term
nlrb v insurance agents international union
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. board should not regulate the economic weapons much.
2. doesn't mean its ok. this is protected under 8b3 good faith, but is not protected against 8a1 and 8a3 |
|
|
Term
nlrb v insurance agents international union
legal principle |
|
Definition
| economic weapons don't indicate bad faith |
|
|
Term
nlrb v american national insurance
question |
|
Definition
| is the ers insistence to have complete control over certain decisions considered bad faith bargaining and a ULP under 8a1 and 8a5? |
|
|
Term
nlrb v american national insurance
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. the role of the board is not to repel concessions, its only to promote bargaining
2. the fear of er avoiding bargaining doesn't justify disallowing all management function clauses
3. this is bad faith
-not following procedure, proposals and counter proposals, sometimes content |
|
|
Term
nlrb v american national insurance
legal principle |
|
Definition
| management function clauses are allowed within good faith bargaining |
|
|
Term
fibreboard paper products corp v nlrb
question |
|
Definition
is the er's refusal to bargain about it's decision to subcontract to independent contractors a 8a5/8a1 violation?
-basically, does it relate to wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment |
|
|
Term
fibreboard paper products corp v nlrb
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. independent contractors are doing the same exact work as the former union guys. motivation is only cost
2. statute. but the literal meaning, the subject matter is literally in the statue. "terms and conditions of employment"
3. there is a duty to bargain, contracting out has been bargained over before
4. purpose of nlra is to promote peaceful disputes between er and ee. the union could offer to compromise by cutting wages. it is possible taht the er would have gotten everything that is needed at the bargaining table. |
|
|
Term
fibreboard paper products corp v nlrb
legal principle |
|
Definition
| when costs are the man issue, the duty to bargain arises |
|
|
Term
fibreboard paper products corp v nlrb
concurrence |
|
Definition
a lot of management decisions about the future of the business are going to affect job security
so if we just relied on a plain language of the statue, then that would require all types of decisions, which affect job security to be bargained over. so don't read the statue too broadly. |
|
|
Term
first national maintenance cooperation v nlrb
question |
|
Definition
| must an er, under it's duty to bargain by 8d and 8a5, negotiate with the certified representative of its employees over its decision to terminate a contract and the effects of the action? |
|
|
Term
first national maintenance cooperation v nlrb
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. main purpose for ending the contract was to stop losing money, bargaining would help that
2. congress didn't intend for union to become an equal enterprise in running the business
3. vs fibreboard decision
er's decision to subcontract did not alter company's basic operation, merely replacing existing ees with those of subcontractor to do same work. |
|
|
Term
first national maintenance cooperation v nlrb
test |
|
Definition
| balancing over management decisions that impact employment should be required only if the benefit for collective bargaining process outweighs the er's right to run business freely |
|
|
Term
first national maintenance cooperation v nlrb
dissent |
|
Definition
| the majority got the balancing test wrong. it should be ees right to organize against business interest. er should have to bargain over closing of business as a matter of 8d |
|
|
Term
first national maintenance cooperation v nlrb
legal principle |
|
Definition
-in view of an ers need for unencumbered decision-making, bargaining over management decision that have a substantial impact on the continued availability of employment should be required only if the benefit, for labor-managemnt relations and the collective-bargaining process, outweighs the burden placed on the conduct of the business.
-don't have to bargain over the decision, but must bargain over the effects |
|
|
Term
dubuque packing co
question |
|
Definition
| did the firm violate 8a5/8a1 by failing to bargain over the decision to relocate work from location x to y? |
|
|
Term
dubuque packing co
reasoning |
|
Definition
more like fb
-work is still going forward
-still doing this to reduce labor costs
-could be improved with bargaining
-fits with FB no change in business nature, labor costs are an issue, er has to show they'd move anyways.
-the court things that concessions might chagne the ers decision |
|
|
Term
dubuque packing co
legal principle |
|
Definition
burden shifting framework
(when is an er decision to relocate work an nlra 8d mandatory subject of bargaining?
-if there is a change in nature of business
(NNTB)
-if no change to business but labor costs aren't the issue
(NNTB)
-no change to business, labor costs aren't an issue, but er would have made the same decision regardless of bargaining
(NNTB) |
|
|
Term
mackay radio and telegraph company
question |
|
Definition
1. was the er in violation of 8a1 and 8a3 when he permanently replaced the five most active union members after a strike but allowed less active union members to return?
2. was it an 8a1 violation o hire permanent replacements during an economic strike? |
|
|
Term
mackay radio and telegraph company
holding |
|
Definition
1. yes the er violated 8a1/8a3 when her permanently replace the five most active workers
2. no it was not a violation to hire permanent replacements for an economic strike |
|
|
Term
mackay radio and telegraph company
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. er could have hired back on the basis of ability, this method discouraged people from joining unions
2. -er has a right to continue it's business.
-can't get temporary workers for 2 weeks |
|
|
Term
american shipbuilding company v nlrb
question |
|
Definition
| does an er violate nlra 8a1/8a3 when he temporarily locks out his ees to put economic pressures on union in support of his bargaining position? |
|
|
Term
american shipbuilding company v nlrb
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. er can use economic weapons too, unions aren't protected from any economic disadvantage
2.no evidence of bad faith bargaining
3. lockout doesn't destroy union's ability to represent ees
4. no evidence of union discrimination
5. permanent replacement would be a violation
6. different than mackay, those people can be permanently replaced because they started a strike. |
|
|
Term
hoffman plastic compounds v nlrb
question |
|
Definition
| can nlrb award backpay to undocumented ee to remedy er's nlra 8a3/8a1 violation? |
|
|
Term
hoffman plastic compounds v nlrb
reasoning |
|
Definition
1. irca threatened and board doesn't have that authority
2. backpay would encourage future violations
3. nlrb discretion broad, but not unlimited
4. other remedies are sufficient |
|
|
Term
hoffman plastic compounds v nlrb
dissent |
|
Definition
1. removing back pay lowers cost of employing unauthorized immigrants - incentivizing their hurts which hurts irca
2. failure to award backpay hurts nlra enforcement |
|
|
Term
nlrb v mackay radio and telegraph company
burden shifting test for an 8a3 |
|
Definition
burden shifting test for an 8a3
1. ee engaged in concerted activity
-(strike)
2. er disadvantaged the ee
-(five workers didn't get reinstated)
3. ers reason was ees concerted activity
-(most active members not reinstated)
4. er needs to provide a legitimate non-discriminatory reason
-(didn't go through the reapplication process until quota was filled)
5. shift to GC, ers reason is pretext or not
-(pretext, told they couldn't work until superior official passed their application.) |
|
|
