Labor Law midterm review - Text Cases Oakwood Care Center...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Text Cases Oakwood Care Center Decision: because there is a multiemployer bargaining unit all three parties must agree to organization, the board overturned the previous Sturgis decision Section 9(b) : the board shall decide in each case whether, in order to assure to employees the fullest freedom in exercising the rights guaranteed by this Act, the unit appropriate for the purposes of collective bargaining shall be… o However, in this case the board is denying the employees freedom to exercise collective bargaining rights NLRB v. Town & Country Electric Decision: yes, the employee can be paid union organizer because there is no disturbance in then the employee is not being disloyal, the employee is doing his job during working hours, but if they do disrupt the workplace then they can be fired Employee organizer has the right to organize during non-work hours in a non-work area o This is a problem for the employer because organizers are protected by the fact that they are employees As long as the employee doesn’t abandon responsibilities he can be a union organizer Brown University Collective bargaining by TA unions would infringe upon traditional academic freedoms But the board did not support their decision with legislative history, because NYU had TA unions NLRB v. Yeshiva University Decision: professors have managerial authority within academic authority (faculty committees, tenure, curriculum, etc.) and by unionizing as employees there would be divided loyalty Oakwood Health Care Decision: nurses are still employees even if they have some managerial control over other employees Section 2(11) : any individual having authority in the interest of the employer, to hire, transfer, suspend, lay off, recall, promote, discharge, assign , reward, or discipline other employees , or responsibly to direct them , or to adjust their grievances, or effectively to recommend such action… but requires the use of independent judgment City Disposal Decision: Brown reasonably and honestly invoked his right to avoid driving unsafe trucks, his action was concerted Board relies on its interpretation of section 7 employees shall have the right to … engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid protection
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Board also must consider section 8(a)(1) to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in section 7 Unusual attribute: although the driver was alone, his activity had an effect on the other employees , so it is concerted. IBM Corp Charge: employer, whose employees are not represented by the union, violated section 8(a)(1) by denying the employees’ requests to have a coworker present during investigatory interviews that might result in discipline Book: the Weingarten right to unionized employees and extending it to all employees are permissible interpretations of the act Decision: a nonunionized employee may not have Weingarten rights because
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/12/2010 for the course ILRCB 2010 taught by Professor Lieberwitzr during the Fall '07 term at Cornell University (Engineering School).

Page1 / 8

Labor Law midterm review - Text Cases Oakwood Care Center...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online