โ Scribed by Alfred T. DeMaria
No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.
Regular readers of this newsletter know that the editor has closely followed the important issue of employee participation committees (EPCs) and the Board's rules that forbid the formation and operation of certain types of these committees. By and large, it is difficult to form EPCs that will pass Board scrutiny, as nearly all of them have been found to be illegal.
While the Board continues to give lip service approval to employers' objective of involving employees in decision making and finds committees such as policy review, safety, and benefits committees to be commendable-at least hypothetically-it has often ruled that the particular means the employer has chosen to achieve its employee involvement aims were unlawful. Thus, even though employers create committees to educate employees, keep company officials informed of employee ideas and sentiments, assist management in making policy and benefit decisions, and increase productivity by encouraging employee involvement in decision making, most of the actual committees created, according to the Board, violate the law.
In determining whether an employer violates the National Labor Relations Act by creating and supporting an EPC, the Board engages in a two-step inquiry, as articulated in its infamous Electromation decision:
๐ SIMILAR VOLUMES
The objective of this study was to examine the experience of spouses caregiving for their spouse with Parkinson's disease (PD) and to determine whether their experiences differed by stage of disease. By using a cross-sectional design and mail questionnaire data from 380 spouse caregivers across 23 s
Economic arguments came into play in the recent U.S. Commerce Department inquiry into the allegation of unfair Canadian government subsidies provided to Canadian cattlemen. The central claim was that the Canadian Wheat Board (CWB), through its control over feed barley exports, was restraining export