I could, but it wouldn't be very long! The whole Act was only three provisions: card check, interest arbitration for initial contracts, and enhanced remedies for employer ULPs. The PRO Act essentially subsumes the EFCA.
Increasing NLRB funding is difficult to justify with the current caseload. As I think you know, doing traditional labor law full time is difficult due to lack of organizing going on.
Hey-- I found this really helpful to read through. I just followed up by skimming the actual act as passed by the House and couldn't find the 'hot cargo' sections. Could you direct me to where I can find them in the text of the bill? Thanks!
At p. 11 of the PRO Act's text, you will see it amends section "(e)" (meaning Section 8(e), the "hot cargo" clause in Taft-Hartley) to now read as a ban on mandatory arbitration agreements. That replaces the language banning contractual language contained in hot-cargo agreements as it presently reads. It's a little confusing, but I think it's a clever substitution because it essentially flips this contractual-language clause from anti-worker to pro-worker. See: https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr842/BILLS-117hr842rfs.pdf
This was extremely helpful and useful! Have you thought about doing one for EFCA, just for posterity's sake?
I could, but it wouldn't be very long! The whole Act was only three provisions: card check, interest arbitration for initial contracts, and enhanced remedies for employer ULPs. The PRO Act essentially subsumes the EFCA.
Labor Law Lite has quickly become one of my favorite Substacks. What a terrific resource. Thank you for doing this!
Appreciate your leg work on this.
Very useful! Thank you.
Increasing NLRB funding is difficult to justify with the current caseload. As I think you know, doing traditional labor law full time is difficult due to lack of organizing going on.
The counterpoint to this argument is that the PRO Act should increase organizing, leading to more R and C cases for the NLRB than currently filed.
No chance that striking down state right to work laws affects NC (and SC, VA, etc) public-sector collective bargaining bans, right?
Correct. The NLRA deals only with private-sector labor law.
How to change these bans, then--aside from state legislative action?
Hey-- I found this really helpful to read through. I just followed up by skimming the actual act as passed by the House and couldn't find the 'hot cargo' sections. Could you direct me to where I can find them in the text of the bill? Thanks!
At p. 11 of the PRO Act's text, you will see it amends section "(e)" (meaning Section 8(e), the "hot cargo" clause in Taft-Hartley) to now read as a ban on mandatory arbitration agreements. That replaces the language banning contractual language contained in hot-cargo agreements as it presently reads. It's a little confusing, but I think it's a clever substitution because it essentially flips this contractual-language clause from anti-worker to pro-worker. See: https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr842/BILLS-117hr842rfs.pdf