What types of strikes are protected by the NLRA?
The NLRA covers several strikes (Budd, 2009). The act covers strikes against unfair labor practices, i.e., employees protest against some unlawful employers’ activities. Economic strikes are also covered. Thus, when employees protest against small salaries or benefits, they are protected by the act. Recognition strikes i.e. strikes aimed at making the employer recognize the union, are also protected by the NLRA. Jurisdictional strikes are aimed at protesting against the assignment of certain tasks or responsibilities to other unions or a group of employees. These strikes are also covered by the act.
We will write a custom Essay on Aspects of Labor Relationships in the USA specifically for you
301 certified writers online
What types of strikes are Unprotected by the NLRA?
Some strikes are not protected by the NLRA as they are seen illegally (Budd, 2009). A sit-down strike is regarded unlawful as the employees sit at their places, they do not work, and prevent others from accessing their workplace. Thus, the employer is deprived of the property, which is equal to endangering the property. Strikes that pose a threat to the property are also regarded as illegal. Strikes that are aimed at featherbedding are also seen as unlawful. Notably, the NLRA does not protect strikes, which violate some agreements between the employer and employees.
Does this make sense, or should all types of strikes be treated equally?
Admittedly, some strikes should not be protected, as they can lead to destruction and violence. For instance, if there is a danger to the property, the gathering cannot be regarded as a manifestation of employees’ needs, but it is, rather, an illegal activity. However, sit-down strikes should not be regarded as unlawful as employers often replace the strikers and simply ignore employees’ demands. It is possible to regard sit-down strikes as illegal, but the employers should not be allowed to replace the strikers in that case. It will force employers to start the dialogue.
To what extent aspects of labor relations in other countries should be adopted in the United States?
Unionism is the USA that is well-developed and business-oriented, which makes it, rather, effective. It may lack some political component. For instance, in France unionism is characterized by its political orientation (Budd, 2009). Thus, unions have often affected the decisions made by the government. This can be adopted by US unions to a certain extent. Nonetheless, it is crucial to add the political component thoughtfully as there is a chance to create unions that are more concerned with the political situation in the country rather than on specific relations between particular employers and their employees.
Should the United States adopt mandatory works councils? Why or why not?
Mandatory works councils should not be introduced in the USA in the nearest future. However, it is necessary to introduce the concept of a country where lots of employees are still underrepresented when it comes to labor relations. Works councils are still new to the USA, and many employees will be unable to benefit from them. Employers, as well as employees, should be informed about works councils, and they should be encouraged to launch them. Works councils will enable any organization to form a specific set of rules to regulate relations between the employer and employees.
What do you believe the future of Unions in the USA will be like?
USA unions will continue developing. Globalization (along with outsourcing and creations of multinationals) leads to the development of global regulations (Fichter, Helfen & Sydow, 2011). Therefore, US unions will adopt some practices common for other countries. Some of these practices will be related to the development of works councils. US unions may become more diverse and well-structured. They can also become more politically oriented. Of course, they will not change significantly in this area, but unions will try to affect certain political decisions in the future.
Budd, J. (2009). Labor relations: Striking a balance. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Fichter, M., Helfen, M., & Sydow, J. (2011). Regulating labor relations in global production networks: Insights on international framework agreements. IPG, 2(1), 69-86.