Class 3 outlines

Collective bargaining obligations

• Introduction
• Multiemployer bargaining
  • Employers’ and union’s consent
    • Sample employer bargaining rights authorization
  • Contractor withdrawal: SQ 1
    • Retail Associates, 120 NLRB 388 (1958)
    • Unequivocal notice
    • Timely: Art XVIII
    • Unusual circumstances: not just impasse or strike
      • Bonanno v. NLRB, 454 U.S. 404 (1982)
      • Not lack of notice: Chel LaCort, 315 NLRB 154 (1994)
      • Not secrecy: D.A. Nolt, 340 NLRB 152 (2003)
    • Obligation after withdrawal: SQ 2
• Good-faith bargaining
  • Strong policy: 29 USC § 158 (a)(5), (b)(3), (d)
  • Refusal (ULP) seen in conduct
  • Reasonable times and places
  • Agreement not required
    • Impasse
    • Interest arbitration

Collective bargaining subjects

• NLRB v. Borg-Warner, 356 U.S. 342 (1958)
• Mandatory subjects
  • Wages and compensation
  • Fringe benefits
  • Work hours, loads, rules
  • Safety practices
  • Grievance procedures
  • Meals, discounts, services
  • Subcontracting: Fibreboard v. NLRB, 379 U.S. 203 (1964)
  • Union security clauses
  • No-strike clauses
  • Drug testing for employees, not applicants
• Permissive subjects
  • Bargaining unit scope
  • Multiemployer bargaining
  • Supervisor contract terms
  • Negotiators’ designation
  • Agreement ratification
  • Interest arbitration: SQ 3
  • IAF, PAC contributions
  • Litigation settlement
  • Business termination
• Illegal subjects
  • Closed shop
  • Certain “hot cargo” agreements: 29 USC § 158(e)

“Bottom-up” organizing

• Employment factors
  • Wages and fringe benefits
  • Supervision
  • Grievance procedure
  • Personal treatment
• Union objective and campaign
  • Field representative barred from employer’s property
    • Lechmere v. NLRB, 502 U.S. 527 (1992)
  • Employees’ role
  • Authorization cards: sample
    • Over 50% authorization
      • Employer “good faith doubt”
        • NLRB v. Gissel Packing, 395 U.S. 575 (1969)
        • Linden Lumber v. NLRB, 419 U.S. 301 (1974)
      • “Neutrality agreements” (“card check”)
        • Dana Corp., 341 NLRB 150 (2004)
          

          “Labor board ruling threatens union recruiting” Reuters (10 June 04)

          “Unions worry NLRB will end organizing tool” The Boston Globe (18 Dec 04)

          Dana Corp., 351 NLRB 28 (2007)
          

          “National Right to Work secures new rights for employees to protect against abusive union ‘card check’ organizing” National Right to Work LDF (2 Oct 07)

          “NLRB modifies ‘recognition bar’ doctrine to permit employees and rival unions to file election petitions” Littler Mendelson PC (Oct 07)

      • Employee Free Choice Act
        • HR 3619/S 1925 (2003), HR 1696/S 842 (2005), HR 800/S 1041 (2007)
          

          “When voting isn’t private” The Center for Union Facts (Dec 06)
          Editorial: “Recognizing Labor” The Nation (17 Dec 06)
          “Union recognition—secret ballot elections and card check coercion” US Chamber of Commerce (4 Jan 07)
          “The Secret Ballot Destruction Act” The American Spectator (23 Jan 07)
          “Labor nails big win as House passes bill” The Seattle Times (2 Mar 07)
          “Employee Free Choice Act” NPR (21 June 07)
          “Republican senators block union bill” The Seattle Times (27 June 07)
          Opinion: “Beyond the Labor Board” The Nation (3 Jan 08)
          “Employee Free Choice Act would disenfranchise 105 million workers” The Heritage Foundation (7 Jan 08)
          “After push for Obama, unions seek new rules” The New York Times (8 Nov 08)
          “A labor-union problem looms for Obama” Los Angeles Times (16 Nov 08)
          “Unions look for new life in world of Obama” The New York Times (28 Dec 08)
          “Are unions dead, or just getting started?” Fox Business (2 Jan 09)
          “Tough choices ahead for workers” Mackinac Center for Public Policy (5 Jan 09)
          “With Senate hearing, preparing for change at top of Labor Dept.” The New York Times (9 Jan 09)
          “Hilda Solis deflects Republican questions over union issues” Los Angeles Times (10 Jan 09)
          “Panelists raise concerns about union bill” The Business Review (Albany) (16 Jan 09)
          Editorial: “Pragmatist-in-Chief” The Washington Post (16 Jan 09)
          Opinion: “Bill would allow unions to expand at all costs” The Boston Globe (18 Jan 09)
          “Card check issue stalls panel’s vote on nominee” Las Vegas Sun (23 Jan 09)
          Opinion: “An early Obama test: unions vs. business” The Boston Globe (23 Jan 09)
          Opinion: “The union way up” Los Angeles Times (26 Jan 09)
          “Reid: Vote on card check bill, a labor priority, likely in summer” Las Vegas Sun (27 Jan 09)

          AFL-CIO support
    • Over 30% authorization
    • Secret Ballot Protection Act
      • HR 4343/S 2637 (2004), HR 874/S 1173 (2005), HR 866/S 1312 (2007)
        • US Chamber of Commerce support
• Representation election
  • NLRB role: 29 USC § 159
  • Election petition: 30% determination
  • Representation hearing: appropriate unit
  • Timing: too early? too late?
  • Contract bar
  • Election: tally and objections
• NLRB certification
  • If employer wins
  • If union wins
    • Employer obligation
      • Agri Processor v. NLRB, 514 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir. 2008)
        • US Supreme Court denies petition (17 Nov 08)
          

          “Supreme Court rejects appeal on aliens’ right to vote in union elections” World of Work (Stoel Rives) (25 Nov 08)

    • Area agreement
    • Impasse
    • Labor Relations First Contract Negotiations Act
      • HR 1412 (1999), HR 652 (2001), HR 93 (2003), HR 101 (2005), HR 142 (2007), HR 243 (2009)
  • Election results: Dec 2008