Jan 12, 2018 in Research

Collective Bargaining

Union security provision is part of union collective bargaining contract, whereby the employer and a labor union consent. The agreement is about the level in which the union should oblige the employees to be part of the union. The bargaining started in the U.S under the rights of collective bargaining through the act of railway of 1926. The bargaining rights controversy was, limiting of the union rights. The union members protested, wrangling was done against the legislation and the legal action had to follow. Several factors were discussed under this negotiation and among them are the three elements discussed below.

The first element majored on infringing apellees’ first amendment rights. The argument was based on the fact that there was no jurisdiction to help them understand whether their rights were infringed. The discussion involved compliance to the union rules and regulation and have mandatory membership to the union. The reforms increased cost without performance, improvement  was required mostly in education sector.  The arguments finally centered on the fact that this was unfair practices of labor and the union board is suppose to have a primary jurisdiction using the announced preemption doctrine in 1959 and it was not to be included in the labour agreement according to court conclusions (“Collective Bargaining Basics: Labor Unions Negotiate Employee Contracts”, 2012).

 The second element based on infringing Buckley and Evans first amendment. The union dues were required. Since the dues were not flat cost forced directly on the exercise of national right, it had to be objected and no body had to be discriminated from taxation. The decision is still unanswered, but the court had to use the union requirement on dues obliged on broad casters (Lombardi, 1975). This means that the argument was agreed upon and it was included in the labour agreement document

The third element was freedom of speech needed by the employees. The employees needed freedom to express their opinions the federal court said that the Apallees and Evans amendments were infringed since they were broadcasters. This meant that this element could not be entered in the labour agreement

Related essays