www.charlesjeromeware.com. " Here to make a difference."
On Wednesday, November 13, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) con-
sidered whether so-called "neutrality agreements" between labor unions and employers violate
federal labor laws.
The key issue in the case [ Unite Here Local 355 vs. Mulhall, SCOTUS Docket No. 12-312,
11th Circuit] , then, is: Whether intangible things can be "deliver[ed]" under Section 302(a) (2) of the Labor Management Relations Act, which makes it unlawful for employers "to pay, lend, or deliver, any money or thing of value ... to any labor organization." 29 U.S.C. Section 186(a)(2).
Operationally, under the " neutrality agreements" businesses help labor unions in organization efforts in exchange for labor peace. For example: An employer might grant access to employee lists or agree to remain neutral in exchange for union concessions, such as giving up the right to organize workers.
In the instant case before the Court, a Florida greyhound track and casino agreed to allow labor union access to worker information as well as casino grounds, and to allow a unionization vote by cards collected from workers, rather than a secret ballot. The union, in exchange, agreed to spend $ 100,000 in support of a gambling referendum and to refrain from picketing during the union drive.
The case is particularly relevant to the hospitality industry, where these types of arrangements are common.
No comments:
Post a Comment