The Right to Strike in Essential Services under United States Labor Law (original) (raw)
Related papers
STRIKE OF WORKERS IN ESSENTIAL SERVICES
The right to strike in essential services creates an inherent problem and a challenge for any democratic society, because it stems from some tension between two rights that must be guaranteed by the state, the right to organize and conduct collective negotiations that involve the freedom to strike and the right of the state to ensure itself and its citizens against harm to security , Safety, health, and the provision of services that are essential to the daily lives of citizens. (Eisenstadt, 1959) (Basic Law: Human Dignity and Liberty) A strike is one of the essential tools that a worker can use when he wants to improve the conditions of his employment with his employer. This is an "organized refusal to work as a form of protest by a workers' body", usually in an attempt to obtain concessions or concessions from their employer. The right to strike is considered one of the basic socio-economic rights in democracy and is recognized as such in international law as well as in laws and rulings in various countries. In general, it is possible to define that the strike is an extreme response of the group of employees to the failure of negotiations with an employer or a group of employers. There are four types of strikes: * An economic strike (when the issue of strike and demand is economic). * A political strike, when the nature of the strike and the dispute is China University of PolitiCal sCienCe and law - aCademiC Press 157 ManageMent HuMan ResouRces and Law david scHwaRtz & BinyaMin guRstein over conceptual ideological and political issues. * A solidarity strike - a strike that takes place out of solidarity and solidarity, and not out of economic or political interests. * A quasi-political strike (when an issue and a subject of strike combine both economic and political interests). The four types of strikes are defined in legislation and definition in countries and international organizations. In most studies, economic strikes are recognized as legitimate, as opposed to political and quasipolitical strikes considered illegitimate. Of course, a decision on this is made in each country separately. (Berenson, Berenson, 2000) (Radai, 1994) (Shaked, 1999) The study of the strike field and its importance is of great importance for several reasons: * The first is due to an overall view of the rights of workers and individuals in a democracy. * Second, recognition of the employee's weakness against the power of an employer.
Labor and capital, both hold an intrinsic role in uplifting the economy of a country. This paper, recognizes the 'Right to Strike' as a statutory right given to the employees (laborers) to fulfil their demands. Although, this right is not a constitutional right, but its statutory recognition is given under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. This right holds a specific social importance, and therefore, its ambit has been increased as a legal right in the current Indian stratosphere. However, this right does have certain 'reasonable restrictions' in order to achieve peace and stability between the employers (the capital class) and the employees (i.e., the labor class). The present paper will mainly focus on the Right to Strike as a statutory right under the Industrial Disputes Act. Furthermore, this paper will also discuss about the International Labor Organization (ILO) which talks about the right to strike in the workplace.
Public Sector Workers' Right to Strike: Arguments For and Against
The issue of whether public employees have a right to strike is a contentious one. In fewer than a dozen U.S. states is it legal for public employees to strike. Recently Illinois state employees belonging to the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) threatened to strike after an impasse in contract talks with state negotiators and unfulfilled past promises of pay increases. The governor insists that he must " push for the taxpayers of Illinois, " while the executive director of AFSCME claims that workers " are getting to the point where they're so angry and so frustrated that they think, 'What's the use of sitting down with these folks every two or three weeks if nothing's going to change?' " In a similar situation, nearly twelve years ago, state employees in Minnesota held a public strike only a month after the September 11 th terrorist attacks, generating a backlash by their fellow citizens, who called the strikers " unpatriotic " and " selfish. " The unresolved issue of whether public employees should have the right to strike pits unionized public workers against elected political officials and tax-paying citizens.
Public Policy and Public Employee Strikes
Industrial Relations, 1977
Policy and Employee Strikes THIS IS A STUDY of the impact of public policy (as expressed in public employment bargaining laws) on public employee strike levels. In following up on a suggestion by Kochan that "it is more appropriate to view policy as an intervening variable between certain antecedent conditions and dependent variables of interest in labor-management relations,"' it finds that public policy does have an effect, but it is less general and less strong than anticipated, and the effect varies considerably among three public employee groups. Methodology To explore the impact of policy, data were gathered by state for the three employee groupsteachers, local government employees (excluding police and firefighters), and state government employees. The study is cross-sectional since data were utilized for one year only, 1973. The analysis included zero-order and partial correlations along with regression analysis. Four ratio scale measures of strike activity were used as dependent variables, with separate measurements being made for each of these three employee groups. Frequency was measured by the number of work stoppages in 1973. The number of workers involved per work stoppage per full-time equivalent was used to measure participation. Duration was measured by the number of man-days idle per worker involved. Finally a summary index was developed, based on the number of man-days idle per full-time equivalent in the employee group.2 Several measures were used because different aspects of work stoppages at least poten-*Assistant Professor, Graduate School of Administration, University of California, Irvine. 'Thomas A. Kochan, "Correlates of State Public Employee Bargaining Laws," Industrial Relations, XI1 (October, 1973), 322. *These four measures were previously used together in an analysis of industrial strike activity. For the logic of using these, see David Britt and Omer R. Galle, "Industrial Conflict and Unionization,"
The Single Employer Doctrine as Applied to Section 8(B)(4) of the National Labor Relations Act
Catholic University Law Review, 1979
This Comments is brought to you for free and open access by CUA Law Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Catholic University Law Review by an authorized editor of CUA Law Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact edinger@law.edu. 1. 29 U.S.C. § 163 (1976). See also the proviso to section 8(b)(4)(B) of the NLRA, 29 U.S.C. § 158(b) (1976), quoted in note 8 infra. 2. NLRB v. Insurance Agents Int'l Union, 361 U.S. 477, 495 (1960). 3. Strikes involving violence are condemned by both state and federal law. See UAW v. Russell, 356 U.S. 634 (1958); Elk Lumber Co., 91 N.L.R.B. 333 (1950) (both the ends of a labor dispute as well as the means used to accomplish those ends must be lawful). 4. No strike clauses are regarded as the quidpro quo for an employer's agreement to arbitrate disputes. Buffalo Forge Co. v. United Steelworkers, 428 U.S. 397, 407 (1976). Strikes in violation of no strike clauses may be grounds for both injunctive relief and damages. Id. at 405. Seegeneraly F. BARTOSIC & R. HARTLEY, LABOR RELATIONS LAW IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR, 202-05 (1977) [hereinafter cited as BARTOSIC & HARTLEY]. 5. See, e.g., section 8(d)(4) of the NLRA, 29 U.S.C. § 158(d)(4) (1976) (prohibiting strikes within a period of sixty days after one of the parties to a collective bargaining agreement gives notice of the intent to terminate or modify the agreement). 6. A lawful strike is a type of primary activity. Although the distinction between lawful primary and unlawful secondary activity is often a difficult one, § 8(b)(4) has never been read to ban striking or picketing which attempts to prevent primary employees, customers, and suppliers from crossing a picket line at the primary employer's premises. International Rice Milling Co., 341 U.S. 665 (1951). Generally, two principal factors determine the nature of primary and secondary activity: the status of the employer and the object of the union exerting the pressure. See generally BARTOSIC & HARTLEY, supra note 4, at 122-26.