Human Resources Labor Laws - Coursework Example

Human Resources Labor Laws There are various labor Acts that have been passed and enacted to protect both the employer and employees in an employer-employee relationship. In the United States, such labor Acts are Railway Labor Act, Norris-La Guardia Act, Wagner Act, Taft-Hartley Act, and Landrum-Griffin act. The railway Labor Act helps to create and maintain a healthy relationship between carriers and their employees in the rail industry. The Norris-La Guardia Act was passed to put a stop to ant-labor injunction and give employees freedom to hold nonviolent labor disputes. The Wagner Act allowed workers the right to join and form unions. It also compelled employers to collectively bargain on behalf of employees with unions. The Taft-Hartley Act outlawed unfair labor practices on the side of the trade unions such as wildcat strikes, jurisdictional strikes, and closed shops. The Landrum-Griffin bill dealt with the relationship between the union and its members. It provides for the reporting and disclosure of specific financial transactions and organizational practices of the labor unions and employers. Railway Labor Act The Railway Labor Act governs labor relations of employees and employers involved in the rail industry. It seeks to promote and uphold peace and order in the rail industry in order to avoid disruptions in interstate commerce. The Act imposes a duty upon all rail carriers and employees to make and maintain their agreements concerning working conditions, rates of pay, and rules. The carriers-employees relations are to be governed by written rules that are mutually agreed upon as well as binding equally on each party. In the case of a dispute, these Act mandates that representatives of the carrier and employees to be accorded equal responsibility to the dispute and hold meetings in an effort of settling the dispute. Also, the disputing parties should designate or choose their representatives without influence, interference or coercion to do so by either party. These representatives of both parties have an obligation to confer in respect of settling the dispute. Though these personal representatives, the Act guarantees employees the right to organize collectively and bargain. Further, it forbids carriers to sign any agreement or contract promising employees to join or not to join any labor organization. Each party has an obligation to give the other party a notice of at least 30 days of the desired change in working conditions, rules or rates of pay embodied in the contract. However, the carrier has no right to alter any part of the agreement while conferences are in progress until the controversy is settled. In regard of these provisions, the Railway Labor Act prevents the disruption of rail service and allows workers to organize unions of their own. It also provides whole independence of organizations by labor and management, and assists to effect settlement of disputes arising in respect to the terms and conditions of the contract (Thomas, 1990). The Norris-La Guardia Act The Norris-La Guardia Act was primarily passed to stop yellow-dog contracts or ant-labor injunctions in 1932. The injunctions forbid workers from holding strikes and pickets, and those who disobeyed were arrested and jailed without trials for contempt of court. The Act sought to bar the federal courts from giving injunctions against peaceful and nonviolent employees during labor disputes. Therefore, it stopped federal courts jurisdictions in regard to the issuance of injunctions. It also intended to prevent employers from interfering with the sole right of employees of joining the trade unions of their choice. It mandated workers to be free to join unions without their employers’ interference. The Act’s provisions aimed to protect employees’ self-organization and liberty outlaw the yellow-dog contract and remove jurisdiction from federal court. In respect of this, federal courts could not enjoin a person engaged in labor disputes and workers were free to strike, hold peaceful assembling, and join a labor organization. The Act further provided that the employee had the freedom to have peaceful picketing and assist in a court case another worker involved in the labor dispute. It also mandated the court to give a temporary restraining order for a given period and hold a fair hearing for each side to present their evidence prior the issuance of a permanent injunction (Kaps, 1997). The Wagner Act The Wagner act is commonly referred as the National Labor Relations Act. The Act gave employees the right to join and form unions; it also compelled employers to collectively bargain on behalf of employees with unions. The majority employees choose or form a union. The Wagner act endorsed the right to strike, disqualified employers for sacking an employee because of performing his or her union activities and required they bargain in good faith. It ensures that organizations and unions work hand in hand in order to create a healthy working environment for the employees. The workers, through the Wagner act, can protect their interests through the formation of labor unions so that they can bargain with their employers as a unit. The Act mandates to protect the right of all workers, as well as their collective bargaining. Under this law, the union elections were certified, and the elections were based on restricted representation. Employers were, therefore, restricted by the act to indulge in unfair practices such as forming a company union and dismissing or discriminating against workers who formed or joined trade unions. In this regard, the Act leads to better management of the organization since most of the unfair labor practices such as discriminatory firings and blacklisting are done away with. The key principles of the Wagner act include protecting the exercise of freedom of association and promoting collective bargaining. This act outlawed five unfair labor practices by employers, including restraining employees against their rights; discriminating against employees; refusing to bargain collectively; interfering with the formation of unions and discriminating against employees who give evidence (Mathis & Jackson, 2012) The Taft-Hartley Act In 1947, the Taft-Hartley Act was passed to make significant changes to the earlier Wagner Act. The Act prohibited unfair labor practices on the side of the trade unions. It prohibited wildcat strikes, jurisdictional strikes, closed shops, monetary donations, secondary boycotts, political strikes, and mass picketing by unions to federal political campaign. The Act prohibited Unions ‘strikes that aims to assign a particular work to employees it represents. It also banned strikes that aim to handle goods of an organization in which the union has no major dispute with, but work hand in hand with the targeted business organization. The Act protected right of employees from coercion or restraints by unions. Therefore, unions could not help employers discriminate against employees for exercising their rights. In regard to closed shops, the Act outlawed contractual agreements that permitted an employer to only recruit members of labor union. The Act provided that an employer could sign the agreement of a union shop under which workers could join the union on or after 30 days of employment. Like Wagner Act, Taft-Hartley Act outlawed secondary boycotts and made it illegal for a union that has major disputes with one employer to pressure the other neutral employer to cease doing business with a former employer. The Act also barred unions from charging excessive initiation fees or dues and from causing an employer pay for unperformed work. In addition, this Act provided a freedom to express opinions, arguments or views. Such freedom of expression could not be used as evidence of unfair labor practices without the threat of promise or reprisal of benefits (Mathis & Jackson, 2012). The Landrum-Griffin act The Landrum-Griffin act is also known as the Labor –Management Reporting and Disclosure Act. It was formed in 1959 when the congress was being scrutinized for racketeering, corruption and other misconducts. The Act deals with the relationship between union and its members. Certain rights are provided to union members, and their interests are protected by promoting democratic measures within labor organizations. The act provided for the reporting and disclosure of specific financial transactions and organizational practices of labor unions and employers. It also outlines standards about the selection of officers of labor organizations and ensures that there are no abuses in the management of trusteeships. Landrum-Griffin Act was signed into law in 1959 and made it unlawful for a union to protest for recognition. It banned secondary boycotts as well as hot goods agreements. However, pre-hire and seven-day union shop contracts were made legal. Some sections of the new law recognized a code of conduct that guarantees specific rights to union members within their union and obligated reporting requirements on unions, their officers, employees and consultants. Thus, the Act protected workers union membership rights from unjust practices by unions. In regard to this Act, unions had to hold private elections that were counter-checked by the department of labor. The union should submit a financial report to the department of labor, provide certain minimum standards before a union may dismiss or discipline a member and protection of union members against discrimination by a bill of rights (Gould, 2004). References Gould, W. B. (2004). A primer on American labor law. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. Kaps, R. W. (1997). Air Transport labor relations. Carbondale, Ill: Southern Illinois Univ. Press. Mathis, R. L., & Jackson, J. H. (2012). Human resource management: Essential perspectives. Mason, Ohio: South-Western. Thomas, W. E., & Dooley, F. J. (1990). Airline labor law: The Railway Labor Act and aviation after deregulation. New York: Quorum Books Read More