National Labor Relations Board Pros And Cons

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) and the U.S. Legal System attempt to “balance” worker’s collective rights to unionization and collective bargaining with employer’s private property rights to run their business. According to Rainsberger (2008), the NLRA and the legal system attempt to protect both the rights of the workers and the employers through
a. an interference with property rights of the employers may result in a legal termination of the employment relationship;
b. under the Taft-Hartley Act, the board is tasked to resolves conflicts between § 7 rights and private property rights and seek accommodation between the two; but what is a “proper accommodation” in any situation may largely depend upon the content and context of §

According to the Wagner Act of 1935, the board ensures that the guidelines such as “the right to talk with union organizers and supporters, socialize with union organizers, attend union meetings, and to become union members. The employees have the right to discuss the pros and cons of union representation amongst themselves. They can solicit authorization cards, distribute literature, serve on a union committee, and wear union gear. They are allowed to support the union position by passing out petitions, through work stoppage, picketing and hand billing, contributing money, and speaking to other employees about the union.” The employers are not allowed to threaten those employees who engage in unions that their membership will merit loss of job, benefits, demotion, being laid off, denied a raise and other disciplinary actions. It can be said that because of the creation of NLRB, the employers can no longer freely enjoy their right to run their business since they don’t have the right to question employees about running the union activities nor use spies or bribe workers to do the

The Wagner act is the only major pro-union act that was passed by congress to help protect the rights of the employees and labor unions. However, this act was limited by the Taft-Hartley Act of 1947. There were a lot of labor leaders who tried to repeal the act and passed new pro-union legislations but were unsuccessful. MacGillis (2010) reported that the Employee Free Choice Act nominated by the National Labor Relations Board through its leader, the union lawyer Craig Becker, still failed to win enough votes and getting weaker. According to the report, during the union wave in 1940s to 1970s, there was a sustained economic growth but until today, the pro-union leaders failed to successfully pass labor laws and the anti-union Taft-Hartley Act is still applicable (MacGillis, 2010). The NLRB on the other hand is still facing a lot of concerns even in filling in their five seats thus resulting in delays for those cases they handled. As reported by MacGillis (2010) there were sixty cases that were pending for more than two years, and due having only two board members, the Supreme Court is taking into consideration if the rulings were valid. Despite this situation, there is still no progress in legislative side of the United States