Labor Relations and Legislation Labor relations are defined as the relationships between the employer and the employee, specifically the unionized employee. It is a set of activities and procedures used to clarify, manage, reduce, and resolve conflicts between an employer and union members (Fossum, 2005). Federal and state laws and regulations govern the conduct of employers and unions in the administration of employee representation and collective bargaining. Prior to the 1930s few laws were in place to protect workers who were unionized or seeking to join or create a unionized work force. Instead, employers had the liberty to spy on, question, punish, black list and fire union members or workers seeking to unionize. However, with the enactment of the Wagner Act, also known as the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), in 1933 the tide of opposition began to turn in favor of the unionization of workers. United States labor law consists primarily of the Norris-LaGuardia, Wagner, Taft-Hartley, Landrum-Griffin Acts, and Public Law 93-360. These laws enable collective bargaining, regulate labor and management activities, and limit intervention by the federal courts in lawful union activities.
Norris-LaGuardia Act In 1932, the Norris-LaGuardia Act was passed. This act had several provisions. It established the law that workers should be free to unionize without employer interference. It removed the federal courts jurisdiction to issue injunctions in nonviolent labor disputes. It also stated a contract that requires a worker to agree not to join a union, as a condition of employment was unenforceable in federal court. However, the Act only governed established employer-union relations, and it did not guarantee collective bargaining rights (Fossum 2005; Taft, 1976).
Wagner Act The Wagner Act, also known as the NLRA, was introduced in 1935. This legislation legalized unions and created the National Labor Relations Board to supervise and administer provisions of the Act such as negotiations between employers and workers, guarantee collective bargaining rights, and prevent employers from engaging in unfair labor practices. The Act had jurisdiction over all institutions, except federal, state, and municipal hospitals, which had an impact on interstate trade (Fossum, 2005; Hernandez & O’connor, 2010).
Taft-Hartley Act In 1947 the Taft-Hartley Act, also know as the Labor Management Relations Act, was passed. It amended the Wagner Act, which many believed favored the unions, by listing unfair labor practices for unions (Hernandez & O’Connor, 2010). This Act specifically excluded coverage for nonprofit hospitals.
Landrum-Griffin Act Containment of unions was further advanced with the enactment in 1959 of the Landrum-Griffin Act, also known as the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act. One provision of this Act that limited unions in regards to unfair financial practices was the requirement that all employers submit a report detailing the nature of any financial transactions that are intended to improve or hinder the union process to the U.S. Secretary of Labor. The law is meant to limit the possibility of corruption in union management relations and foster democracy within unions (Barbash, 1976; Hernandez & O’Connor, 2010).
Public Law 93-360 In 1974, Public Law 93-360 was enacted. This act amended the Taft-Hartley Act in that it specifically addressed the health care industry. The Act extended jurisdiction of the labor laws to include all healthcare organizations under nonpublic ownership and control (Hernandez & O’Connor, 2010). This provided healthcare workers the ability to organize and bargain collectively under the protection of the NLRA. This legislation not only allowed unionization of workers within this industry, but it also helped ensure adequate patient care activities continued through requirement of a ten day advance strike notice, longer periods o intention to modify existing agreements, and mandatory mediation (Hernandez & O’Connor).
According to Fossum (2005), several factors influence workers’ preference for unions, the strongest being dissatisfaction with job security, economics, and management practices. Job dissatisfaction coupled with the employees perception that they are unable to influence or change the work environment heavily influences the choice of workers to seek union representation. Therefore, it is important that managers understand the impact employee job satisfaction and decision-making abilities has on workers preference for unionization.