Sectoral Bargaining: Labor’s Pathway to Power?

Q3 Social Sciences
Peter Olney, Randall K. Wilson
{"title":"Sectoral Bargaining: Labor’s Pathway to Power?","authors":"Peter Olney, Randall K. Wilson","doi":"10.1177/10957960221117828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"contrac-tors. 2 Jennifer Abruzzo, whom Biden appointed as general counsel to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), stunned employers by issuing a memo deeming mandatory “cap-tive audience” meetings to be unlawful. Given the widespread use by employers of these meetings to dissuade workers from voting for union-ization, this posture holds great potential significance.To consider how this may play out, history provides some useful examples of the positive interaction between politics and policy and mass labor organizing. The 1934 West Coast dockers/maritime strike took place a year ahead of the passage of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which provided a legal frame-work to enterprise-level or workplace-based bargaining. But the earlier passage of the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) featured provisions giving workers the right to engage in concerted activity and bargain collectively over wages, hours, and conditions. 3 Although later invalidated by the Supreme Court in 1935, this law, with its sweeping industry regulations, was the product of social ferment and political will. Sensing that FDR had their back, passage of the NIRA gave courage and legitimacy to the 12,000 dockworkers who went on strike for eighty-four days on the West Coast. 4","PeriodicalId":37142,"journal":{"name":"New Labor Forum","volume":"31 1","pages":"28 - 35"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New Labor Forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10957960221117828","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

contrac-tors. 2 Jennifer Abruzzo, whom Biden appointed as general counsel to the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), stunned employers by issuing a memo deeming mandatory “cap-tive audience” meetings to be unlawful. Given the widespread use by employers of these meetings to dissuade workers from voting for union-ization, this posture holds great potential significance.To consider how this may play out, history provides some useful examples of the positive interaction between politics and policy and mass labor organizing. The 1934 West Coast dockers/maritime strike took place a year ahead of the passage of the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), which provided a legal frame-work to enterprise-level or workplace-based bargaining. But the earlier passage of the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) signed into law by President Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) featured provisions giving workers the right to engage in concerted activity and bargain collectively over wages, hours, and conditions. 3 Although later invalidated by the Supreme Court in 1935, this law, with its sweeping industry regulations, was the product of social ferment and political will. Sensing that FDR had their back, passage of the NIRA gave courage and legitimacy to the 12,000 dockworkers who went on strike for eighty-four days on the West Coast. 4
部门谈判:劳工的权力之路?
合同方。2拜登任命珍妮弗·阿布鲁佐为国家劳工关系委员会(NLRB)总法律顾问,她发布了一份备忘录,认为强制性的“上限观众”会议是非法的,这让雇主感到震惊。鉴于雇主广泛利用这些会议来劝阻工人投票支持工会,这种姿态具有巨大的潜在意义。为了考虑这可能会如何发展,历史提供了一些政治、政策和大规模劳工组织之间积极互动的有用例子。1934年西海岸码头工人/海事罢工发生在《国家劳动关系法》通过前一年,该法为企业级或基于工作场所的谈判提供了法律框架。但早些时候,由富兰克林·罗斯福总统签署成为法律的《国家工业复苏法》(NIRA)通过了一些条款,赋予工人参与协调一致的活动并就工资、工作时间和条件进行集体谈判的权利。3尽管后来在1935年被最高法院宣布无效,但这部法律及其全面的行业法规是社会动荡和政治意愿的产物。感觉到罗斯福支持他们,NIRA的通过给了在西海岸罢工84天的12000名码头工人勇气和合法性。4.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
New Labor Forum
New Labor Forum Social Sciences-Urban Studies
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
37
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信