Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- A.B.5 (1)
- Abood (1)
- Agency fees (1)
- Agency law (1)
- Beck (1)
-
- Borello (1)
- Common law definition of employment (1)
- Compelled speech (1)
- Compelled unionism (1)
- Construction (1)
- Control test (1)
- Darden (1)
- Dissenting employees (1)
- Dynamex (1)
- ERISA (1)
- Employee status (1)
- Employers (1)
- Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) (1)
- First amendment (1)
- Free speech (1)
- Freedom of association (1)
- Gig economy (1)
- Independent contractor (1)
- Janus (1)
- Labor (1)
- Labor law (1)
- Lyft (1)
- Misclassification (1)
- NLRA (1)
- Private sector (1)
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Entire DC Network
Compelled Unionism In The Private Sector After Janus: Why Unions Should Not Profit From Dissenting Employees, Giovanna Bonafede
Compelled Unionism In The Private Sector After Janus: Why Unions Should Not Profit From Dissenting Employees, Giovanna Bonafede
Catholic University Law Review
This Note examines the impact of the 2018 landmark labor law case Janus v. AFSCME. Janus held it unconstitutional under the First Amendment to require public sector employees to pay fees to a union to which they are not a member. The Supreme Court based their decision on the idea that compelling public employees to subsidize union speech to which they disagreed violated their free speech rights. The author argues that the Court’s holding in Janus should be extended to protect the free speech rights of private sector employees through a finding of state action in the private unionized …
Defining Who Is An Employee After A.B.5: Trading Uniformity And Simplicity For Expanded Coverage, Edward A. Zelinsky
Defining Who Is An Employee After A.B.5: Trading Uniformity And Simplicity For Expanded Coverage, Edward A. Zelinsky
Catholic University Law Review
A.B.5 made a significant but limited expansion of the coverage of California labor law but at a notable cost. Even as A.B.5 broadened the reach of the Golden State’s labor protections, A.B.5 also made the definition of “employee” more complex and less uniform. Those seeking federal or state legislation like A.B.5 confront the same trade-off under which greater coverage is achieved at the expense of more complexity and less uniformity in the definition of who is an employee. The same political forces and policy considerations which molded A.B.5 in California will have similar effects in other states and in the …
Whose Choice?: The Future Of Construction (And Maybe All) Labor Law, Michael J. Hayes
Whose Choice?: The Future Of Construction (And Maybe All) Labor Law, Michael J. Hayes
Catholic University Law Review
The current National Labor Relations Board ("Board') since 2018 has indicated an interest in changing the law on employee representation by unions in the construction industry, culminating in a final rule issued on April 1, 2020. As the article discusses, this proposal is likely to have effects in many industries other than construction, because many other industries in the U.S. are becoming more like the construction industry has long been. The Board’s rule has changed what's required for a construction union to remain the representative of a construction employer's employees, which the Board justified as serving "employee choice" about union …