Law Commons^™

Dueling Democracies: Protecting Labor Representation Elections From Governmental Interference, John W. Teeter Jr

Faculty Articles

Public officials should be free to support or oppose unionization, but we must prevent their electioneering from undermining the industrial democracy of labor representative elections. Such elections are designed to be freely held; workers decide whether they wish to be represented by a union for purposes of collective bargaining. This choice of whether to unionize is for the workers alone without any governmental favoritism or coercion.

Government officials however have repeatedly jeopardized laboratory conditions by campaigning in labor representation elections. The Board should reassure workers of their right to cast uncoerced ballots, clarify that the political officials are not declaring …

Representation Elections, Anti-Semitism And The National Labor Relations Board, John W. Teeter Jr, Christopher Burnett

Faculty Articles

The use of anti-Jewish propaganda in labor representation elections undermines employee freedom and workplace democracy. This Judeopathic practice has proved to be a vexing problem for both the National Labor Relations Board (“the Board”) and the federal courts. The Board has been haphazard and lax in applying the doctrine of Sewell Manufacturing Co. in cases involving anti-Semitism, whereas the federal appellate courts have applied Sewell more consistently to purge elections of anti-Jewish misconduct. This divergence between the Board and reviewing courts may be the result of a pattern of nonacquiescence on the part of the Board. There are four fundamental …

Between The Buttons: Employer Distribution Of Antiunion Insignia, John W. Teeter Jr

Faculty Articles

Employers should be forbidden from offering antiunion insignia to their workers. This is not contrary to current labor rules that allow employers and their supervisors to wear insignia. The workers' rights would still be safeguarded because employees would remain free to buy or create their own antiunion insignia. The goal is to protect the right of workers to debate, campaign, and vote on unionization with no harm to legitimate needs for self expression.

Generally, workers are entitled to wear campaign insignia regardless of whether it supports or decries unionization. In this manner, workers can openly proclaim their beliefs and seek …

Fair Notice: Assuring Victims Of Unfair Labor Practices That Their Rights Will Be Respected, John W. Teeter Jr

Faculty Articles

Employers should always be required to read notices aloud to their workers as a standard remedy for violations of the National Labor Relations Act. Such a remedy would be a small but essential step in redressing the harm inflicted on workers by an employer’s unfair labor practices. Such notices are necessary for a series of reasons. First, millions of Americans suffer from reading deficiencies and cannot comprehend a printed notice. Second, even literate employees may not happen to observe the printed notice at the workplace. Third, a mere piece of paper is unlikely to reassure victims of unfair labor practices …

Banning The Buttons: Employer Interference With The Right To Wear Union Insignia In The Workplace, John W. Teeter Jr

Faculty Articles

The right for workers to wear union insignia without fear of retaliation in the workplace has been constricted, undermined, and jeopardized by judicial and National Labor Relations Board (“Board”) decisions. As a consequence, at least three problems arise: (1) litigation over this issue increases as the law becomes increasingly opaque; (2) workers are wrongfully denied the opportunity to proclaim their union sympathies; and (3) the Board and courts send an implicit message that the freedom to express union support is a second-class right that employers may override by offering a pretextual justification. This subordination of the right to wear union …

Inadvisable Advice: Limits On Employers' Counseling Of Employees With Regard To Unfair Labor Practice Proceedings, John W. Teeter Jr

Faculty Articles

The National Labor Relations Board frequently interviews or subpoenas employees to help determine whether an employer has committed an unfair labor practice. Many employers, however, have advised their employees that they may refuse to cooperate with the Board's efforts. Professor Teeter argues that such advice has an inherent tendency to coerce employees and to frustrate the Board's vindication of their statutory rights. After reviewing the inconsistent approaches tribunals have taken to this problem, the author recommends that employers be prohibited from counseling employees regarding their participation in the Board's proceedings. Professor Teeter concludes that the Board itself should be the …

Keeping The Faith: The Problem Of Apparent Bias In Labor Representation Elections, John W. Teeter Jr

Faculty Articles

Any procedure requiring a “fair” election must honor the rights of both those who oppose and those who favor a union. The National Labor Relations Act (“Act”) is wholly neutral when it comes to that choice. Under the terms of the Act, employees have the right to form unions but also have the right to refrain from such activities. The National Labor Relations Board’s (“Board”) role in representation elections is to ascertain the employee's’ wishes concerning unionization, and not to influence that fundamental choice. The Board’s appearance of neutrality may be undermined through fraternization, the delegation of duties, and allegedly …