Labor Law eJournal最新文献

{"title":"Improving Employment Standards Compliance: Institutional Learning and the Dual Regulatory Stream","authors":"David J. Doorey","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1791815","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1791815","url":null,"abstract":"A reasonable starting point for improving the situation of vulnerable employees is improving compliance with the Employment Standards Act. This submission deals specifically with the question of how to do that through a set of relatively modest legal reforms. The proposed reforms would, firstly, dramatically improve information flow and knowledge of ESA standards by requiring employers to learn their legal obligations and to pass on that knowledge to their employees. Secondly, the proposal would break down the traditional division between employment law and labour law by requiring that employers \"earn\" the legal rights our present labour law model confers on all employers to resist unionization by their employees. Employers who violate the ESA should forfeit the right to proselytize against collective bargaining and to insist on a certification ballot in addition to written evidence of employee support for it. By developing a dual regulatory stream model, the proposal charts a path forward that would at once increase the incentive for nonunion employers to comply with the ESA while also elevate the probability that employees of non-compliant employers will obtain the assistance of knowledgeable and skilled worker advocates.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128042763","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Recruitment, Retention and Exit from Union Membership - An Analysis of Member Flows in Swiss Union Locals","authors":"Daniel Oesch","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1802425","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1802425","url":null,"abstract":"This article enquires into the causes of union growth and decline by analysing flows in and out of membership at the level of 70 Swiss union locals over 2006-2008. Gross flows in union membership are much larger than the resulting net changes: annual membership turnover of 10 per cent is a surprisingly constant feature across unions. Net changes in membership are primarily determined by inflows: successful and languishing union locals differ in their entry rates, whereas exit rates are similar. Variance in union locals’ entry rates is not usefully explained by the labour market context, but by differences in union strategy.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"22 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127110200","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Collective Bargaining in the Shadow of the Charter Cathedral: Union Strategies in a Post B.C. Health World","authors":"Michael MacNeil","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1739392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1739392","url":null,"abstract":"For the first twenty-five years after the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms was enacted, it appeared that it would have little impact on Canadian labour laws. The Supreme Court of Canada took the view that the guarantee of freedom of association in the Charter did not include a right to strike and did not provide protection for collective bargaining. Common law rules regulating picketing did not come within the scope of the Charter’s rules on freedom of expression. Academic commentators were divided on whether this was a good or a bad thing, some espousing the hope that the Charter could be applied in pursuit of greater justice in the workplace while others were thankful that the courts were not interfering with legislative formulation of collective bargaining law and policy. Slowly, however, the courts have come to a different view of the Charter, finding that its values serve to provide protection for picketing, and in a sweeping revision of former jurisprudence in 2007 holding that the guarantee of freedom of association does provide protection for collective bargaining. This article describes the changing judicial views of the Charter through three distinct periods, each roughly a decade long: the formative period, the period of consolidation, and the period of re-assessment. It also traces some of the academic reaction to these developments. It concludes by an assessment of how the unions are attempting to harness the changing view of the Charter to pursue a variety of challenges to the existing legislative collective bargaining schemes in Canada. In doing so, the paper uses the metaphor of the Charter as a cathedral, with the judges and academic commentators as artists painting a variety of views of the Cathedral. It is only through assessing the multiplicity of views that one can hope to achieve even a partial understanding of the Charter’s role in Canadian labour law.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"15 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132079664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Labouring in the Public Interest","authors":"D. Mangan","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1713634","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1713634","url":null,"abstract":"Part of the difficulty in public sector labour relations is the apparently inevitable confrontation between government and civil service unions. This idea is sketched out here with particular attention to the inherently political nature of public sector education in England and Canada. Of the many characteristics of public sector labour relations, governments’ dual role as employer and legislator remains the most distinctive. It provides an advantage which governing parties in both jurisdictions have used to their singular benefit. This power is also the source of limitations within the public sector labour relations framework. With little recourse via the law (grievances, legislation), teachers’ unions have taken their message to the public in an attempt to improve their leverage in negotiations with government. Developing in the late 20th century, public campaigns have been a favoured means for highlighting issues which fit under the broad catchphrase of protecting quality in public education. Conversely, government may also implement its own rebuttal campaign based on the need for financial restraint. As part of this contest, both sides invoke the threat of public outcry as a force which each claims it may muster, for the purpose of maximising its bargaining position. This is the framework of contemporary public sector education collective negotiations. In effect, modern day public sector education bargaining has become the means of retrenchment: government, in a centralised funding arrangement such as that in England and Ontario, allocates money and dictates the terms of employment.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123885274","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Employee ‘Free’ Choice in the Mirror of Liberty, Fairness and Social Welfare","authors":"H. Hutchison","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1688005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1688005","url":null,"abstract":"The publication of Richard Epstein’s book, The Case Against the Employee Free Choice Act provides an opportunity to reconsider (A) the movement to displace the regime of judge-made law that had previously governed labor relationships, (B) the purpose of the NLRA and (C) the revolutionary implications of the effort to transform the NLRA into a law that places its thumb on the scale in favor of unionization. Describing the central provisions of the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), its economic consequences, its constitutional implications, and its connection to the decline of unionism, Epstein offers a balanced portrayal of the EFCA that suggests this statutory initiative diminishes human liberty and compromises the interests of most workers, employers, and the nation as a whole.Beyond Epstein’s manifestly correct emphasis on the proposal’s unfairness to workers and employers tied to possible union coercion and his assessment of the initiative’s adverse social welfare implications, the case against the EFCA should be expanded in two ways. First, his critique could be enriched by deconstructing progressive presuppositions tied to this initiative and by focusing on the disproportionately adverse consequence of this proposal on marginalized Americans. Such consequences persist in America’s current era. Second, Epstein’s examination would be enhanced by understanding the EFCA as an attempt by highly politicized labor unions to gain additional political revenues for broad social purposes that are unrelated to both collective bargaining objectives and workers’ actual preferences.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"171 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129416528","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Constitutionalizing the Right of Workers to Organize, Bargain and Strike: The Sight of One Shoulder Shrugging","authors":"H. Arthurs","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1645259","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1645259","url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Court of Canada may well conclude in Fraser that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms confers upon agricultural workers the full panoply of bargaining rights provided under contemporary Canadian collective bargaining legislation, from the right to be represented exclusively by the bargaining agent chosen by the majority, to the right to engage their employer in good faith negotiations, to the right to strike. If the Court does so, its decision will be greeted with delight by progressive legal scholars, proponents of countervailing power as a strategy of labour market regulation, and true believers in the potential of constitutional and international rights discourse to transform political economy and social relations. There will be congratulations all 'round: to the skilled advocates who will have achieved a famous victory against long odds; to the imaginative academics who will have erected the conceptual scaffolding on which counsel’s arguments will have been constructed; and not least, to the judges who will have finally liberated themselves from the tyranny of precedent and sloughed off 200 years of curial antipathy to workers and their interests.Of course, not everyone will be delighted. Dour devotees of legal logic and historical accuracy are likely to grimace or roll their eyes; neo-liberals who favour unregulated labour markets and managerial unilateralism will cry havoc; and sceptics who question the capacity of courts to bring about deep and lasting change, and the wisdom of asking them to do so, will simply shrug. I consider myself to be a progressive scholar who recalls the bygone era of collective bargaining with great nostalgia; I admire skilled lawyers and free-thinking judges and have built the odd conceptual scaffold for both in my time; and I retain an atavistic attachment to logic and historical accuracy. But because most of all I am a sceptic, I will shrug.Of course, I will shrug with one shoulder only. Clearly, the Agricultural Employees Protection Act was a cynical attempt to perpetuate the unjustified exclusion of workers on farms and in food processing plants from the regime of collective bargaining. Clearly these workers should have the same rights to organize, bargain and strike as workers in auto plants and banks - however modest the value of those rights may turn out to be in practice. Consequently, if the Supreme Court decides in their favour, one shoulder will remain firmly in place; but the other will shrug.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117098427","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"How Did Workers Fare in Labor Mediation – An Empirical Assessment from Taiwan","authors":"Kuo‐Chang Huang, Kong‐Pin Chen, C. Lin","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1876184","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1876184","url":null,"abstract":"Using newly collected data on labor disputes in Taiwan, we study how laborers fare in labor mediation. Our strongest result is that in the cases involving small claims, workers obtained a substantially high portion of their claim, a result unlikely to occur if those laborers had to resort to litigation. Overall, our study indicates that labor mediation is effective in helping the financially disadvantaged individual workers to obtain substantial recovery from their employers.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"115 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127781459","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The NBA and the Great Recession: Implications for the Upcoming Collective Bargaining Agreement Renegotiation","authors":"Matthew J. Parlow","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1615666","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1615666","url":null,"abstract":"Like most businesses, the National Basketball Association (NBA) has suffered significant negative impacts from the Great Recession. The league’s drop in revenue exposed distinct flaws in the NBA’s current business model and in the terms of employment for NBA players. Due to the precarious economic state of the NBA, the league anticipates a contentious, but necessary, renegotiation of the NBA’s collective bargaining agreement (CBA), which will expire at the end of the 2010-11 season. This article will analyze the effects of the Great Recession on the NBA and the likely implications for the renegotiation of the CBA. Part II of this article will provide a macro-level overview of the economic impacts experienced by the NBA during the current economic meltdown. Part III will explore the attendant effects on NBA players. Part IV will then give an overview of the collective bargaining process – including its significance in sports, antitrust, and labor and employment law – and explore the employment terms that will likely become the focus of the upcoming CBA renegotiation. Finally, Part V will provide some concluding insights.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"13 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"120889228","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"A Union of Equal Rights: 14 Penn Plaza- Placing Employees on Equal Footing with Union Laborers","authors":"S. Rogers","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1947154","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1947154","url":null,"abstract":"This Note examines the majority and dissenting opinions’ reasoning in the Supreme Court Decision in 14 Penn Plaza and concludes that union members in the modern era of labor in the United States are at risk of offering their own personal rights on the union’s altar of bargaining for the collective good. The decision of how to pursue resolution of workplace discrimination, including the where, when, and in what forum, is now considered to be in the hands of union leaders, not individual employees.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129400474","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"First Contract Arbitration and the Employee Free Choice Act","authors":"Catherine L. Fisk, Adam R. Pulver","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1410220","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1410220","url":null,"abstract":"One provision of the proposed Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA) would address the catastrophic underenforcement of the statutory right of employees to bargain, which results in half of all newly certified or recognized unions failing to secure a first collective bargaining agreement. It is an important reform for a seriously dysfunctional aspect of federal labor law and it will be a substantial improvement over the status quo. While political and media conversation surrounding EFCA has largely focused on the changing the process by which unions are selected, the provision for first contract arbitration is as important to the protection of the right to unionize.This Article argues that some form of mandatory interest arbitration for first contract disputes is an appropriate means of stabilizing employee-management relations given the extraordinary difficulties that unions currently experience in negotiating first contracts, the weakness of current NLRB and economic remedies, and the rippling effects of these difficulties on nascent unions. The Article surveys the empirical literature on the operation of interest arbitration in the public and private sector in the United States and in Canada and demonstrates that interest arbitration would increase the incentive for employers to negotiate in good-faith and make reasonable proposals. The Article shows that none of the alternative reforms to the law of collective bargaining and to NLRB procedures for protecting the right to bargain will be effective in addressing failures to bargain to a first contract. The Article also demonstrates that a statutory requirement of first contract arbitration is well within Congress’ power and does not represent an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority.","PeriodicalId":215343,"journal":{"name":"Labor Law eJournal","volume":"93 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2010-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121989734","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}