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

Law Commons

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

University of Michigan Law School

Labor and Employment Law

Union

1956

Articles 1 - 4 of 4

Full-Text Articles in Law

Labor Law - Lmra - Validity Under Federal Act Of State Right To Work Statute Interpreted To Bar Exclusive Bargaining Rights Clause, Edward W. Powers S.Ed. Apr 1956

Labor Law - Lmra - Validity Under Federal Act Of State Right To Work Statute Interpreted To Bar Exclusive Bargaining Rights Clause, Edward W. Powers S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

Plaintiff employer, operator of a retail food store, refused to sign a contract with a union representing the only two butchers then employed by him on the ground that acceptance of a clause in the contract making the union the exclusive bargaining representative of all butchers in his establishment would violate the state right to work statute. The two butchers went on strike and began picketing the employer's establishment. The employer thereupon hired a non-union butcher and sought to have the picketing enjoined. The state district court denied the injunction. On certiorari to the state supreme court, held, reversed, …


Labor Law - Collective Bargaining - Duty Of Employer To Allow Union Time Study, Paul A. Heinen S.Ed. Apr 1956

Labor Law - Collective Bargaining - Duty Of Employer To Allow Union Time Study, Paul A. Heinen S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

A dispute arose between the employer and the union as to whether certain duties performed by an employee should be classified as "special assignments" as defined in the labor contract. If these duties were "special assignments" the employee was entitled to a higher job classification. Before arrangements could be made for the third step of the grievance procedure the union asked for permission to enter the plant and analyze the job. Permission was denied by the management and the union filed a charge of unlawful refusal to bargain. The trial examiner found that by refusing the union's request the employer …


Labor Law - Collective Bargaining - Unprotected Activities Of Union As Violation Of Duty To Bargain In Good Faith, Hazen V. Hatch S.Ed. Apr 1956

Labor Law - Collective Bargaining - Unprotected Activities Of Union As Violation Of Duty To Bargain In Good Faith, Hazen V. Hatch S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

During negotiations for a new contract, the union engaged in harassing action against the employer by promoting an organized refusal to work overtime, extending rest periods without authorization, directing employees to refuse to work special hours, encouraging slow-downs and unannounced walkouts, and inducing employees of a subcontractor not to work for their employer. There was no specific demand which the activity was designed to enforce. The National Labor Relations Board found that this activity was evidence of a failure on the part of the union to bargain in good faith, and was, therefore, a violation of section 8 (b) (3) …


Labor Law - Lmra - Strike Without Compliance With Arbitration Clause Of Collective Agreement As Unprotected Concerted Activity, Hazen V. Hatch S.Ed. Feb 1956

Labor Law - Lmra - Strike Without Compliance With Arbitration Clause Of Collective Agreement As Unprotected Concerted Activity, Hazen V. Hatch S.Ed.

Michigan Law Review

A dispute arose over the working hours and assignment of one of the employer's truck drivers. The employer suggested to the union that they refer the question to an arbitration panel for adjudication. The collective bargaining agreement provided that the panel was to be the exclusive means of settling all such matters, but the agreement did not contain a specific no-strike clause. The union refused to arbitrate and ordered a strike. Subsequently, the employer discharged twenty of the strikers and then refused to reinstate them at the termination of the strike. The union claimed that the strike was a protected …