Summary. Neither industrial nor nonindustrial rehired workers were markedly aided by the decisions. Union officials and fellow workers both displayed open hostility to reinstated employees, particularly to those who had breached union‐fixed working rules. Furthermore, with the exception of the factionalists, rehired workers were unlikely to overcome union hostility. As one subject reported in graphic terms, “the NLRB case turned into a fight to the finish, and when I won the union did not surrender but just continued fighting me.” Given such conditions, discriminated workers could hardly be expected to re‐establish and reassert their membership rights. We need further study here, but it seems that among industrial subjects there was a correlation between unwilling union membership and discrimination. It appears more than mere chance that industrial workers who cared little for unions, tried to evade paying dues, subverted union rules, and were independent‐minded found themselves the victims of union‐caused discrimination. When rehired, they rarely changed their attitudes and conduct, and locals were unlikely to welcome them with open arms. By contrast, labor pool subjects in the main were staunch unionists before discrimination and after reinstatement. The data suggest that either certain types of workers enter craft occupations or the characteristics of the industries they work in tend to compel employees to behave in a certain manner within their unions. Since such workers looked to their unions for employment and the enforcement of standards and working rules, strong internal cohesion was not surprising. Two reservations should be noted to the above generalizations. Where the subjects suffered discrimination because they had been protecting group rights or supporting factions or rival unions, their reinstatement led them to even greater union participation. Where the local was dominated by a single, powerful leader, the reinstated worker's union activity tended to decrease.
Change your habit to hang or waste the time to only chat with your friends. It is done by your everyday, don't you feel bored? Now, we will show you the new habit that, actually it's a very old habit to do that can make your life more qualified. When feeling bored of always chatting with your friends all free time, you can find the book enPDF labor legislation from an economic point of view and then read it. This sales letter may not influence you to be smarter, but the book that we offer will evoke you to be smarter. Yeah, at least you'll know more than others who don't. This is what called as the quality life improvisation. Why should this labor legislation from an economic point of view? It's because this is your favourite theme to read. If you like this theme about, why don't you read the book to enrich your discussion?
Statistics continue to show an increase in inconclusive NLRB elections, 1 an increase in the number of objections filed by employers, 2 and an increase in the number of public reports on objections and determinative challenges.' Whether one considers the figures alarming, interesting, or expected, they raise questions about the usefulness of elections for settling representation issues. Both the public and the labor-management community prefer elections as the means for deciding whether or not workers wish union representation. Indeed, the recent celebration of the twenty-five-millionth voter was shared by influential public and private leaders. Even the critics of the NLRB who condemn the Board's reliance upon authorization cards to establish majority relresentation extol the election process. In view of this apparent support, increased union and management dissatisfaction with elections certainly warrants concern.The utility of elections lies in final, definitive and unchallenged results; elections become useless when the results are challenged, uncertain, or rejected. Elections are intended to establish and stabilize representation, not to leave it unsettled and in dispute.This article focuses upon the functional aspect of NLRB elections, namely, deciding questions of representation. My major thesis is that definitive election results are needed to satisfy representational requirements. I seek to direct attention to the consequences of inconclusive elections, and to present a viewpoint from which to look at the increasing number of objections. There is here no exposition or analysis of decisions, no discussion of free speech, and no criticism of campaign tactics or electioneering. Primarily, I view the increasing number of inconclusive elections from the perspective of a participating administrator. For "data" I rely upon my quarter-century with the NLRB. During this period I have been involved directly in investigating, researching, and reporting some 550 cases of objections and challenges.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.