Management Relations Discussion Paper

Traditionally, the activities of labor unions have supported the development of gains for the American worker. As labor unions negotiate with management, those gains set a standard for other non-union organizations. The U.S. has enacted a number of laws that protect workers such as the Civil Rights Act, Equal Pay Act, Occupational Safety and Health Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Family and Medical Leave Act. In this assignment, you will explore some of the major US labor laws.

Prepare an 800–1000 word paper that addresses following:

What is a yellow dog contract as described in the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932?
What was the purpose of the Wagner act of 1935?
Compared to the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 and the Wagner Act of 1935, what impact did the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 have on labor unions?
Do employment laws replace the need for labor unions? Are these acts still relevant in today\’s business environment? Why or why not?

Management relations

What is a yellow dog contract as described in the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932?

The Norris LaGuardia Act of 1932 describes a yellow dog contract as a pledge by personnel/staff not to join a labor union. In fact, it is an agreement between the personnel and employer in which the employer gets the personnel to agree not to become members of any labor union as a condition for their employment. In addition, the agreement allowed the employers to take legal action against union organizers. These contracts were common prior to the 1930s with the intention of halting the formation of unions. The contracts were legally halted in 1932 by the Norris-LaGuardia Act that removed the judicial and legal barriers against the formation and activities of labor unions thus nullifying yellow dog contracts. The act had three provisions that protected the employees’ rights to liberty and self-organization, removed the jurisdiction over non-violent labor disputes from federal courts, and outlawed yellow dog contracts thus prohibiting employers from barring personnel from joining labor unions as a term of employment (Lumen Candela, n.d.). As such, the yellow dog contract prohibited personnel from joining labor unions as a term of employment.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

What was the purpose of the Wagner act of 1935?

The Wagner Act of 1935 (also dubbed National Labor Relations Act) is a legislation that guaranteed the rights of personnel to organize themselves into labor unions to address management relations issues. The act offers a legal framework that is intended to protect workers as they organize themselves to pursue better employment terms. In addition, the act offers a framework for collective bargaining that allowed the unions to negotiate with the management on behalf of their members/personnel. Besides protecting personnel, the act also protects employers through offering a framework for addressing commercial interests while protecting all parties involved, the business and economy (Doyle, 2018). Management Relations Discussion Paper The act specifically targets five unfair labor practices. Firstly, it prevents employers from coercing, restraining or interfering with personnel as they exercise their rights that include the freedom to bargain collectively, and organize and join unions. Secondly, it prohibits employers from interfering with or controlling the creation and administration of labor unions. Thirdly, it prohibits employers from discriminating against personnel in a bid to influence their support for labor organizations. Fourthly, it prohibits employers from discriminating against personnel who act in accordance with the provisions of the act, either giving testimony or filing charges under the act. Finally, they prohibit employers from refusing to collectively bargain with labor unions who represent their personnel. Besides the five practice, the act sets up the National Labor Relations Board that oversees the management of union relations, designating the legal structure for how unions should be formed, decertified, and conduct elections. Also, the board investigates charges brought for violating the act, offers forums for alternative dispute resolution, conducts hearings, and oversees enforcement of court decisions (Doyle, 2018).

Compared to the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 and the Wagner Act of 1935, what impact did the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 have on labor unions?

The Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 is the result of amendments made to the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932 and the Wagner Act of 1935. The Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 addressed an emerging injustice exhibited by the unions having too much power. In presenting the Taft-Hartley Act, the legislators sought to limit the influence of labor unions as the earlier legislations were thought to have shifted the balance of power to far in favor of the labor unions and away from the employers. Firstly, the act offers the personnel right to refuse to join unions and decertify the unions that do not act in their best interests. Secondly, the act demands that unions honor existing contracts with employers without threatening them with strikes and boycotts. Thirdly, it prohibits unions from charging excessive fees and demanding payment for their personnel for work not performed. Fourthly, it includes a provision for free-speech. Finally, it excluded management members from leading labor unions (Doyle, 2018). Overall, the act ensures that there is a balance of power between employers and unions.

Do employment laws replace the need for labor unions? Are these acts still relevant in today’s business environment? Why or why not?

Employment laws do not replace the need for labor unions. Rather, they define the scope of activities that labor unions can engage in and ensure that there is a balance of power without being unfair to the employers, the personnel or unions. However, there is a concern that these acts are losing their relevance in today’s business environment. These acts were presented to address industrial economies, as was the case at the time, but that is no longer the case. In fact, these acts do not meet the needs of today’s business environment because they prevent union members from receiving wage raises as individuals, and prevents the non-union personnel from having a formal voice when engaging their employers. The implication is that there is a need to modernize employment laws by removing the ability of unions to veto individual personnel wage raises, and allowing non-union personnel to have a formal voice when engaging employers (Sherk, 2013). Overall, the employment laws are becoming less relevant in today’s business environment because they offer a weak statutory framework that only recognize collective action while ignoring individual action.

References

Doyle, A. (2018). The Wagner Act of 1935 (National Labor Relations Act). Retrieved from https://www.thebalancecareers.com/the-wagner-act-of-1935-national-labor-relations-act-2060509

Lumen Candela (n.d.). Organized labor and related laws. Retrieved from https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-business/chapter/organized-labor-and-related-laws/

Sherk, J. (2013). Labor unions: reckoning membership shows labor laws need modernizing. Retrieved from https://www.heritage.org/jobs-and-labor/report/labor-unions-declining-membership-shows-labor-laws-need-modernizing

SHRM (2016). Norris LaGuardia Act. Retrieved from https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/legal-and-compliance/employment-law/pages/norris-laguardia-act.aspx  .  Management Relations Discussion Paper