Collective bargaining

Collective bargaining is the process through which representatives of UNIONs and management negotiate a labor agreement. The WAGNER ACT (National Labor Relations Act, 1935) defines collective bargaining as follows. For the purpose of (this act) to bargain collectively is the performance of the mutual obligation of the employer and the representative of the employees to meet at reasonable times and confer in good faith with respect to wages, hours, and terms and conditions of employment, or the negotiation of an agreement, or any question arising there under, and the execution of a written contract incorporating any agreement reached if requested by either party, but such obligation does not compel either party to agree to proposal or require the making of a concession. This definition means that both labor and management are required by law to negotiate wages, hours, and conditions of EMPLOYMENT “in good faith”—that is, both sides are negotiating, putting forth proposals, and responding to proposals with counter proposals, though neither side is required to agree with what is proposed by the other side. Collective bargaining is seen by some economists as a countervailing force against the power of huge CORPORATIONs. Through much of the early history of the United States, the few unions that existed had limited power to represent workers. Courts frequently treated unions as illegal criminal conspiracies and often sanctioned the use of police to counter union activity. In the early 20th century, with the expansion of industrialization in America, union membership grew and federal legislation began to recognize the rights of workers to organize and be represented by collective bargaining. The Wagner Act was the third in a series of acts expanding the power of organized labor. In 1926 Congress passed the Railway Labor Act, regulating labor relations in the railroad industry. The NORRIS-LAGUARDIA ACT (1932) limited the circumstances in which FEDERAL COURTS could enjoin strikes and picketing in labor disputes and also prohibited federal-court enforcement of “yellow-dog” contracts (under which employees agreed not to join or remain a member of a union). The Wagner Act created the NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD (NLRB), gave workers the right to organize and bargain collectively, and prohibited certain labor practices that were perceived to discourage collective bargaining, including
• interfering with employees’ rights to form, join, and assist labor unions
• dominating or interfering with the formation or administration of a labor union
• discriminating against employees in hiring, tenure, or any term of employment due to their union membership
• discrimination against employees because they have filed charges or given testimony under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA)
• refusing to bargain collectively with any duly designated employee representative
The NLRB and numerous court decisions have interpreted what is good-faith collective bargaining and what items are mandatory, permissible, and legal in collectivebargaining negotiations. ARBITRATION and mediation are often used to resolve collective bargaining disputes. The TAFT-HARTLEY ACT (Labor-Management Relations Act, 1947) rewrote NLRA powers, making secondary BOYCOTTS an illegal labor tactic, but also increased enforcement of collective- bargaining agreements. In the 1980s, changes in the makeup of the NLRB reduced union power in collective-bargaining agreements. In the NLRB v. Bildisco (1984) case, the Supreme Court upheld a decision that employers may file a Chapter 11 bankruptcy petition and immediately break an existing collective-bargaining agreement without first communicating with the union. Congress then changed the bankruptcy code, requiring companies to consult with unions before using bankruptcy relief from collective-bargaining agreements. Bruce Fisher and Michael Phillips write “The Supreme Court has ruled that employers may shut down a plant permanently without committing an unfair labor practice, “provided the employer does not have the intent to discourage unionization elsewhere.” Similarly, court decisions have addressed whether a successor company is liable for a collective bargaining agreement reached by the previous owners. Fisher and Phillips summarize the NLRB v. Burns International Security Services (1987) case, in which the NLRB ruled that “although the new employer is not bound by the substantive provisions of the predecessor’s bargaining agreement, it has an obligation to bargain with the union so long as it is in fact a successor to the old employer and the majority of its employees were employed by the predecessor.” Employers can be charged with “Boulwareism,” a violation of the duty to bargain in good faith. Named after a General Electric executive, Fisher and Phillips define Boulwareism as “an employer’s careful study of all bargaining issues before meeting the union, and presenting its best offer to the union immediately on a take-it-or-leave-it basis.” This process suggests a “closed-mind” attitude that violates good-faith collective bargaining.