Contributions to Books «Previous Next»

Patterned Responses to Organizing: Case Studies of the Union-Busting Convention

Richard W. Hurd, Cornell University
Joseph B. Uehlein, Labor Heritage Foundation

Article comments

Suggested Citation
Hurd, R. W. & Uehlein, J. B. (1994). Patterned responses to organizing: Case studies of the union-busting convention [Electronic version]. In S. Friedman, R. W. Hurd, R. A. Oswald & R. L. Seeber (Eds.) Restoring the promise of American labor law (pp. 61-74). Ithaca, NY: ILR Press.
http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/articles/320/


Required Publisher Statement
Reprinted with permission of Cornell University.

Abstract

[Excerpt] In June 1993, the Industrial Union Department (IUD) of the AFL-CIO initiated a project to gather cases from affiliated unions that would highlight aspects of the National Labor Relations Board process deserving attention from those shaping labor law reform proposals. Based on the cases submitted, we conclude that in its current form the National Labor Relations Act serves to impede union organizing. Particularly problematic are NLRB policies that allow employers to wage no-holds-barred antiunion campaigns. Even where there are legal restrictions on specific actions, the penalties for violations are so meager that they serve no deterrent effect. The cases described below cover many industries, all parts of the country, large units and small, and collectively suggest that union busting has become the convention among U.S. employers.

Suggested Citation

Richard W. Hurd and Joseph B. Uehlein. "Patterned Responses to Organizing: Case Studies of the Union-Busting Convention" Articles & Chapters. , 1994.
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/richard_hurd/22