Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Discipline
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Congress, The Executive Branch, And Special Interests: The American Response To The Arab Boycott Of Israel, Michigan Law Review
Congress, The Executive Branch, And Special Interests: The American Response To The Arab Boycott Of Israel, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
A Review of Congress, The Executive Branch, and Special Interests: The American Response to the Arab Boycott of Israel by Kennan L. Teslik
Secondary Consumer Picketing, Statutory Interpretation And The First Amendment, Michigan Law Review
Secondary Consumer Picketing, Statutory Interpretation And The First Amendment, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note examines both the statutory and constitutional implications of Safeco and Tree Fruits. It suggests that the confusion surrounding existing Board and court interpretations of section 8(b)(4)(ii)(B) stems from the Supreme Court's failure to assess realistically the impact that consumer picketing has on secondary businesses, as well as the Court's refusal to examine the objectives of unions that resort to secondary picketing.
The Antitrust Implications Of The Arab Boycott, Michigan Law Review
The Antitrust Implications Of The Arab Boycott, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note focuses on the legal means that can and should be used to challenge both the economic pressures exerted upon American companies and the subsequent participation by such companies in the boycott of Israel and blacklisted firms. The Note contends that, while "quiet diplomacy and persuasion" are perhaps the only means short of full-scale economic warfare available to the United States to eliminate completely Arab economic pressures and their coercive effects, the United States antitrust laws are sufficient to counteract many of the boycott's actual or potential manifestations. Specifically, the Note demonstrates that the Arab boycott and the discriminatory …
Labor Law--Boycotts And Strikes--Picketing--The Picketing Of An Independent Warehouse I Which A Primary Employer's Goods Are Stored-- Steelworkers, Local 6991 (Auburndale Freezer Corp.), Michigan Law Review
Labor Law--Boycotts And Strikes--Picketing--The Picketing Of An Independent Warehouse I Which A Primary Employer's Goods Are Stored-- Steelworkers, Local 6991 (Auburndale Freezer Corp.), Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
When a group of employees strike against their own employer--the primary employer-their purpose usually is to disrupt his operations in the hope that economic pressure will persuade or coerce him to meet their demands. They may picket the primary employer's premises in order to publicize the strike or to try to persuade fellow employees to join it; and even if the picketing induces third persons not to deal with the primary, the employees' activity constitutes protected primary picketing. If the goal of the striking employees is in fact to publicize the strike and to persuade their co-workers, they will naturally …
Labor Law--Boycotts And Strikes--Replaced Economic Strikers Who Apply For Reinstatement Remain Employees And Are Entitled To Reinstatement When Positions Become Available--Laidlaw Corporation And Local 681, International Brotherhood Of Pulp, Sulphite, And Paper Mill Workers, Afl-Cio, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
The collective bargaining agreement between the Laidlaw Corporation and Local 681 of the International Brotherhood of Pulp, Sulphite, and Paper Mill Workers, the certified bargaining agent for Laidlaw's employees, contained a provision for modification of wages during the term of the contract. In October 1965, the union notified the company that, pursuant to this provision, it desired to negotiate a wage increase. On January 10, 1966, after two unproductive bargaining sessions, the union voted to reject Laidlaw's only offer, and two days later approximately seventy employees went on strike. When no settlement was reached by February 11, forty of the …
Constitutional Law-Strike As Interference With Interstate Commerce
Constitutional Law-Strike As Interference With Interstate Commerce
Michigan Law Review
Whether the federal courts have jurisdiction to apply the mailed fist of the injunction to the settlement of strike disputes sometimes depends on whether the strike is deemed an interference with interstate commerce. Thus, the Supreme Court held in the recent case of Levering & Garrigues v. Morrin that relief must be denied a group of New York structural steel fabricators who sought to enjoin the boycott activities of the iron workers union, because " . . . the sole aim of the conspiracy was to halt or suppress local building operations as a means of compelling the employment of …