“现在你有了,现在你没有了”:nlrb与weingarten右派的反复无常,以及国会结束争议的必要性

J. Owens, J. F. Morgan, G. Gomes
{"title":"“现在你有了,现在你没有了”:nlrb与weingarten右派的反复无常,以及国会结束争议的必要性","authors":"J. Owens, J. F. Morgan, G. Gomes","doi":"10.2190/PFDL-BVJ1-0N2B-TU0Y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"For more than two decades a debate has raged over whether nonunionized employees are entitled to a witness in investigatory interviews that could lead to disciplinary actions. Such a right was determined to exist for unionized employees in the 1975 landmark decision of National Labor Relations Board v. J. Weingarten, Inc. Ever since, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has wrestled with the question of whether the so-called “Weingarten right” should be extended to all employees, whether unionized or not. After reviewing the important decisions that illustrate the NLRB’s incessant flip-flopping on the issue, we provide a summary of the NLRB’s latest (June 2004) rationale for denying this right to nonunion workers. To prevent the further and inevitable politicization of this issue if left to the whims of an ever-shifting NLRB majority, we suggest that Congress more fully enunciate the applicability of the Weingarten right to the nonunion workplace by amending the relevant section of the NLRA. The most important single piece of federal legislation in the area of labormanagement relations is the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) [1]. Under the NLRA, Congress created public policy that seeks to balance the rights, responsibilities, and bargaining power of employers and employees. Individuals tend to think about the NLRA in terms of a unionized workplace. What many","PeriodicalId":371129,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"\\\"NOW YOU HAVE IT, NOW YOU DON'T\\\": THE NLRB'S FICKLE AFFAIR WITH THE WEINGARTEN RIGHT AND THE NEED FOR CONGRESS TO END THE CONTROVERSY\",\"authors\":\"J. Owens, J. F. Morgan, G. Gomes\",\"doi\":\"10.2190/PFDL-BVJ1-0N2B-TU0Y\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"For more than two decades a debate has raged over whether nonunionized employees are entitled to a witness in investigatory interviews that could lead to disciplinary actions. Such a right was determined to exist for unionized employees in the 1975 landmark decision of National Labor Relations Board v. J. Weingarten, Inc. Ever since, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has wrestled with the question of whether the so-called “Weingarten right” should be extended to all employees, whether unionized or not. After reviewing the important decisions that illustrate the NLRB’s incessant flip-flopping on the issue, we provide a summary of the NLRB’s latest (June 2004) rationale for denying this right to nonunion workers. To prevent the further and inevitable politicization of this issue if left to the whims of an ever-shifting NLRB majority, we suggest that Congress more fully enunciate the applicability of the Weingarten right to the nonunion workplace by amending the relevant section of the NLRA. The most important single piece of federal legislation in the area of labormanagement relations is the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) [1]. Under the NLRA, Congress created public policy that seeks to balance the rights, responsibilities, and bargaining power of employers and employees. Individuals tend to think about the NLRA in terms of a unionized workplace. What many\",\"PeriodicalId\":371129,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Individual Employment Rights\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Individual Employment Rights\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2190/PFDL-BVJ1-0N2B-TU0Y\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Individual Employment Rights","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2190/PFDL-BVJ1-0N2B-TU0Y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

二十多年来,关于非工会雇员是否有权在可能导致纪律处分的调查面谈中获得证人的争论一直很激烈。1975年国家劳工关系委员会诉J. Weingarten公司一案的里程碑式裁决确定了工会雇员的这种权利。从那以后,美国国家劳工关系委员会(National Labor Relations Board,简称NLRB)就一直纠结于所谓的“温加滕权利”是否应该扩展到所有员工,无论他们是否加入工会。在回顾了国家劳资关系委员会在这个问题上反复无常的重要决定之后,我们总结了国家劳资关系委员会最近(2004年6月)拒绝非工会工人享有这一权利的理由。为了防止这个问题进一步和不可避免的政治化,如果把它放在不断变化的国家劳资关系委员会多数人的突发事件中,我们建议国会通过修改国家劳资关系委员会的相关条款,更充分地阐明Weingarten权利对非工会工作场所的适用性。在劳资关系领域最重要的联邦立法是《国家劳动关系法》(National Labor relations Act, NLRA)[1]。根据NLRA,国会制定了旨在平衡雇主和雇员的权利、责任和议价能力的公共政策。人们倾向于认为NLRA是一个工会化的工作场所。许多
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"NOW YOU HAVE IT, NOW YOU DON'T": THE NLRB'S FICKLE AFFAIR WITH THE WEINGARTEN RIGHT AND THE NEED FOR CONGRESS TO END THE CONTROVERSY
For more than two decades a debate has raged over whether nonunionized employees are entitled to a witness in investigatory interviews that could lead to disciplinary actions. Such a right was determined to exist for unionized employees in the 1975 landmark decision of National Labor Relations Board v. J. Weingarten, Inc. Ever since, the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has wrestled with the question of whether the so-called “Weingarten right” should be extended to all employees, whether unionized or not. After reviewing the important decisions that illustrate the NLRB’s incessant flip-flopping on the issue, we provide a summary of the NLRB’s latest (June 2004) rationale for denying this right to nonunion workers. To prevent the further and inevitable politicization of this issue if left to the whims of an ever-shifting NLRB majority, we suggest that Congress more fully enunciate the applicability of the Weingarten right to the nonunion workplace by amending the relevant section of the NLRA. The most important single piece of federal legislation in the area of labormanagement relations is the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) [1]. Under the NLRA, Congress created public policy that seeks to balance the rights, responsibilities, and bargaining power of employers and employees. Individuals tend to think about the NLRA in terms of a unionized workplace. What many
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Navigating the Land Mines of the Family and Medical Leave Act Dress and Grooming Standards: How Legal are They? EQUAL PAY ACT CASES IN HIGHER EDUCATION Disparate Impact Discrimination and the ADEA: Coming of Age Disciplining Employees for Free Speech, Whistle Blowing, and Political Activities
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1