Oversight Hearing, Developments in Labor Law Affecting the Construction Industry: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Labor-Management Relations of the Committee on Education and Labor, House of Representatives, Ninety-eighth Congress, First Session, Hearing Held in Washington, D.C., on March 8, 1983
United States. Congress. House. Committee on Education and Labor. Subcommittee on Labor-Management Relations
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1984 - 117 pages
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
agree allow antitrust apply appropriate avoid basis believe benefits Board breasted building BURTON Chairman choice circuit collective bargaining agreement competitive concern Congress construction industry contract contractor decided decision determination double double-breasted effectively election employer employment enforce ERLENBORN fact filed force GEORGINE given hearing Higdon hiring ignore intended interest interpretation issue labor relations legislative Local majority ment Mills National Labor Relations NLRA NLRB NLRB Dec nonunion Operating Engineers operations opportunity organization performed Peter Kiewit petition picketing practice prehire agreement President problem procedure question referred represented result REVIEW ROUKEMA section 8(f secure separate single employer situation skilled South Prairie statement status struction supra note Supreme Court Thank tion trades union Union Representation unit wages workers
Page 29 - Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all of such activities...
Page 62 - So long as a union acts in its self-interest and does not combine with non-labor groups, the licit and the illicit under § 20 are not to be distinguished by any judgment regarding the wisdom or unwisdom, the Tightness or wrongness, the selfishness or unselfishness of the end of which the particular union activities are the means.
Page 71 - Representatives designated or selected for the purposes of collective bargaining by the majority of the employees in a unit appropriate for such purposes, shall be the exclusive representatives of all the employees in such unit for the purposes of collective bargaining in respect to rates of pay, wages, hours of employment, or other conditions of employment...
Page 71 - Act, assuring employees the right "to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing" or "to refrain from
Page 24 - Employer, that it is engaged in commerce within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act, and that the purposes of the Act will best be served if we assume jurisdiction in this case.
Page 25 - Woll, the court found that the act of establishing a company that would operate nonunion "constituted a very substantial qualitative degree of centralized control of labor relations.
Page 60 - Provided, That nothing in this subsection (e) shall apply to an agreement between a labor organization and an employer in the construction industry relating to the contracting or subcontracting of work to bo done at the site of the construction, alteration, painting, or repair of a building, structure, or other work: Provided further, That for the purposes of this subsection (e) and section 8(b)(4)(B) the terms "any employer...
Page 27 - 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...
Page 25 - ... interrelations of operations, common management, centralized control of labor relations, and common ownership or financial control of the employer and the entity.
Page 62 - US 184, 209, an elimination of price competition based on differences in labor standards is the objective of any national labor organization. But this effect on competition has not been considered to be the kind of curtailment of price competition prohibited by the Sherman Act.