Regulation of Collective Bargaining by the National Labor Relations Board

Abstract:This article argues that federal labor policy was a factor in causing the Great Compression, the dramatic compression of skill-based wage differentials that occurred in the 1940s, and in bringing it to an end. By giving the National Labor Relations Board the power to determine the appropriate collective-bargaining unit, New Dealers gave industrial unions the means with which to build a more egalitarian wage structure. Unskilled and semiskilled workers seized the opportunity and voted themselves big pay raises. Skilled craftsmen responded by petitioning the NLRB for permission to form their own craft bargaining units, a process known as “craft severance.” As conservatives gained influence in Washington in the 1940s, the board adopted a bargaining-unit policy more favorable to craft unions. By the early 1950s, skilled craftsmen had regained control of their wage demands and thereby helped bring the Great Compression to a halt.

Download Full-text

A Different Set of Rules? NLRB Proposed Rule Making and Student Worker Unionization Rights

10.31235/osf.io/beahj ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

William A. Herbert ◽

Joseph van der Naald

Keyword(s):

Collective Bargaining ◽

Empirical Evidence ◽

Labor Relations ◽

Graduate Assistants ◽

Economic Relationships ◽

National Labor Relations Board ◽

Private And Public ◽

Student Employees ◽

Student Workers ◽

The Right

This article presents data, precedent, and empirical evidence relevant to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) proposal to issue a new rule to exclude graduate assistants and other student employees from coverage under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The analysis in three parts. First, the authors show through an analysis of information from other federal agencies that the adoption of the proposed NLRB rule would exclude over 81,000 graduate assistants on private campuses from the right to unionize and engage in collective bargaining. Second, the article presents a legal history from the past half-century about unionization of student employees at private and public sector institutions of higher education, including the NLRB’s oscillation on the question of whether student employees are protected under the NLRA. The inconsistencies of the NLRB is in stark contrast to state and Canadian provincial precedent during the same period. Lastly, the authors analyze the terms of 42 current collective bargaining agreements covering student workers, including 10 at the private sector institutions. The empirical evidence from five decades of relevant collective bargaining history, precedent, and contracts demonstrates consistent economic relationships between student employees and their institutions.

Download Full-text

College Faculty's Attitudes toward its Union under Conditions of Adversity

Psychological Reports ◽

10.2466/pr0.1983.53.1.335 ◽

1983 ◽

Vol 53 (1) ◽

pp. 335-338

Author(s):

Philip Harris ◽

Walter Reichman ◽

Alan Jacobs

Keyword(s):

Collective Bargaining ◽

Labor Relations ◽

Likert Scale ◽

National Labor Relations Board ◽

Chi Squared ◽

Yeshiva University

A survey was conducted among unionized faculty in a northeastern college which previously had two strikes before concluding collective bargaining agreements. The respondents were aware that a ruling was imminent on the college's application to the National Labor Relations Board claiming that the faculty was management, as per the Yeshiva University decision. Also, the respondents were concerned because several of their colleagues were terminated for “financial exigency,” an employer's explanation unacceptable to the union, which had its own version of the motives for the dismissals. The results of the Likert-scale questionnaire developed by Uphoff and Dunnette demonstrated overwhelming approval of the union and its procedures. The data showed significant values of chi-squared for sex, rank, age, and tenure. Also, females were more approving of union communication than males, and higher ranked faculty were more supportive of grievance adjudication and less supportive of affiliation with national unions than lower ranked faculty.

Download Full-text