1. One of the main tasks of the NLRB is interpreting the facts of individual labor cases in light of both the National Labor Relations Act and legal precedent. The Noel Canning decision required the current NLRB board to have to reinstate virtually all of the rulings from the recess appointment boards for the 2011 and 2012 terms. Have these rulings expanded or narrowed the reach of the NLRB’s authority?

National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning affects the president’s authority to make temporary appointments to Executive and Judicial Branch offices pursuant to the Recess Appointment Clause. In January of 2012 President Obama recess appointed three individuals on the National Labor Relations Board for unions engaged in unfair labor practices. February 2012 NLRB concluded Noel Canning had committed an unfair labor practice; Noel Canning filed a petition for review. The decision for NLRB to reinstate for all rulings from recess appointment boards for the 2011 and 2012 terms narrows the reach of the NLRB’s authority; the overturning of these rulings has made NLRB’s precedents invalid. NLRB’s cases from 2012-13 would have to be reevaluated seeing that the standards have changed.

2. In both the private and public sectors, a sharp increase in union membership coincides with the passage of protective legislation. A longstanding debate is …show more content…
Increased demand for unionization could be a result in new legislation as well as new legislation could be the result of increased demand for unionization. For example, the congress passed Wagner Act to promote and protect workers’ abilities to unionize in the private sector if they choose so. On the other hand, if congress passed the Wagner Act in the interest of protecting the interest in unions for reasons other than labor demands there would be an opposite effect of increase for unionization. I believe labor law is more important when a demand for