Magazine article HRMagazine

Supreme Court Sidesteps Neutrality Question

Magazine article HRMagazine

Supreme Court Sidesteps Neutrality Question

Article excerpt

The U.S. Supreme Court dismissed, without opinion, a case raising the lawfulness of neutrality agreements entered into between employers and unions that are seeking to organize company employees. In a one-line ruling issued Dec. 10, 2013, the high court said the dispute in Unite Here Local 355 v. Mulhall (No. 12-99) was not properly before it.

At issue was an 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decision that an agreement between Unite Here Local 355 and Mardi Gras Gaming violated the Labor Management Relations Act, an anti-bribery provision that makes it a crime for an employer "to pay, lend or deliver, or agree to pay, lend or deliver, any money or other thing of value" to a labor union that represents or seeks to represent its employees.

In the agreement, the company promised to allow union representatives access to nonpublic work premises during nonwork hours; give the union a list of employees with job classifications, departments and addresses; and remain neutral on the unionization. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.