Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 6 of 6
Full-Text Articles in Law
Pro-Whistleblower Reform In The Post-Garcetti Era, Julian W. Kleinbrodt
Pro-Whistleblower Reform In The Post-Garcetti Era, Julian W. Kleinbrodt
Michigan Law Review
Whistleblowers who expose government ineptitude, inefficiency, and corruption are valuable assets to a well-functioning democracy. Until recently, the Connick–Pickering test governed public employee speech law; it gave First Amendment protection to government employees who spoke on matters of public concern—-such as whistleblowers-—so long as the government’s administrative concerns did not outweigh the employees’ free speech interests. The Supreme Court significantly curtailed the protection of such speech in its recent case, Garcetti v. Ceballos. This case created a categorical threshold requirement that afforded no protection to speech made as an employee rather than as a citizen. Garcetti’s problematic rule has forced …
Policeman, Citizen, Or Both? A Civilian Analogue Exception To Garcetti V. Ceballos, Caroline A. Flynn
Policeman, Citizen, Or Both? A Civilian Analogue Exception To Garcetti V. Ceballos, Caroline A. Flynn
Michigan Law Review
The First Amendment prohibits the government from leveraging its employment relationship with a public employee in order to silence the employee's speech. But the Supreme Court dramatically curtailed this right in Garcetti v. Ceballos by installing a categorical bar: if the public employee spoke "pursuant to her official duties," her First Amendment retaliation claim cannot proceed. Garcetti requires the employee to show that she was speaking entirely "as a citizen" and not at all "as an employee." But this is a false dichotomy - especially because the value of the employee's speech to the public is no less if she …
Employment Law And Social Equality, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Employment Law And Social Equality, Samuel R. Bagenstos
Michigan Law Review
What is the normative justification for individual employment law? For a number of legal scholars, the answer is economic efficiency. Other scholars argue, to the contrary, that employment law protects against (vaguely defined) imbalances of bargaining power and exploitation. Against both of these positions, this Article argues that individual employment law is best understood as advancing a particular conception of equality. That conception, which many legal and political theorists have called social equality, focuses on eliminating hierarchies of social status. This Article argues that individual employment law, like employment discrimination law, is justified as preventing employers from contributing to or …
Labor Law--Picketing--Constitutional Law--First Amendment Challenges By Federal Employees To The Broad Labor Picketing Proscription Of Executive Order 11491, Michigan Law Review
Labor Law--Picketing--Constitutional Law--First Amendment Challenges By Federal Employees To The Broad Labor Picketing Proscription Of Executive Order 11491, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
This Note will consider the constitutional validity of section 19(b)(4)'s broad prohibition against federal-employee labor picketing. However, before the first amendment questions are considered, two preliminary issues should be discussed.
Labor Law--Constitutionality Of Affidavit And Filing Provisions Of Taft-Hartley Act, Jerry S. Mccroskey S.Ed.
Labor Law--Constitutionality Of Affidavit And Filing Provisions Of Taft-Hartley Act, Jerry S. Mccroskey S.Ed.
Michigan Law Review
Plaintiff union, its president, and two union members sought to enjoin the National Labor Relations Board and its members individually from disqualifying plaintiff union from participation in union representation elections held by the board among the employees of two Great Lakes shipping companies. The exclusion of the plaintiff union was based on its failure to file affidavits and reports under sections 9 (f), 9 (g), and 9 (h) of the Taft-Hartley Act, which failure by the terms of the act served to disqualify the non-complying union from participation in board procedures. The plaintiff union attacked the requirements as unconstitutional. Held …
Labor Law - Constitutional Law - National Labor Relations Act- Right Of Employer To Disparage Labor Unions And To Advise His Employees Against Joining Them, William C. Wetherbee
Labor Law - Constitutional Law - National Labor Relations Act- Right Of Employer To Disparage Labor Unions And To Advise His Employees Against Joining Them, William C. Wetherbee
Michigan Law Review
In the spring of 1937 the respondent distributed anti-union literature to its employees. Some of the material specifically denied any design on the part of the employer to prevent the employees from joining a union, and none of the literature pretended to be more than the advice and opinions of the employer. Nevertheless, the unions were thoroughly condemned as rackets, controlled by Communists, which deprive the workingman of his economic freedom and force him to pay for the privilege of working. The National Labor Relations Board found that the distribution of this literature interfered with, restrained, and coerced the employees …