Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

PDF

University of Michigan Law School

Labor and Employment Law

Strikes

1939

Articles 1 - 3 of 3

Full-Text Articles in Law

Labor Law - National Labor Relations Act - Employee Misconduct As Barring Relief, John C. Griffin Jun 1939

Labor Law - National Labor Relations Act - Employee Misconduct As Barring Relief, John C. Griffin

Michigan Law Review

The problem to be considered in this comment is the extent to which employees will, as a consequence of wrongful action on their part, be denied benefits secured to them by the National Labor Relations Act. Inherently, the discussion must also include the examination of another fundamental issue; viz., what is the proper relation between the National Labor Relations Board and the courts on this problem? The substantive question may arise either where the employer seeks to justify a discharge of the worker because of alleged misconduct, or where the misconduct is sought to be used as an estoppel against …


Regulation Of Labor Unions And Labor Disputes In France, Rudolf B. Sobernheim, V. Henry Rothschild 2nd May 1939

Regulation Of Labor Unions And Labor Disputes In France, Rudolf B. Sobernheim, V. Henry Rothschild 2nd

Michigan Law Review

In a study of British labor, Andre Philip contrasted what he termed "le Trade Unionisme'' of England with les syndicats professionels of France. So foreign did he deem the British concept of trade unionism to his French readers that, in speaking of British trade unions, he preferred not to use the French term.


Labor Law - Right Of Employer Guilty Of Unfair Labor Practices To Discharge For Illegal Acts, John C. Griffin Mar 1939

Labor Law - Right Of Employer Guilty Of Unfair Labor Practices To Discharge For Illegal Acts, John C. Griffin

Michigan Law Review

During a membership drive in the Fansteel Metallurgical plants, the petitioner corporation was guilty of an unfair labor practice in that it hired espionage agents to spy upon the union. Lodge 66 attempted to bargain collectively with the petitioner and on its rejection of their offer, the union seized the key plants, effectively stopping production. The petitioner, on the union's refusal to vacate, made a blanket discharge of everyone within the plant, and secured an injunction against the union's possession. Compliance with the order was not obtained, and a writ of attachment for contempt was issued. On the second attempt …