No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
HE growth of multi-employer bargaining' has been accompanied by increased litigation regarding the legality of the so-called multi-employ-.er "defensive" lockout, i.e., a lockout by the unstruck members of a multi-employer bargaining unit, who are subject to an express or implied strike threat, in response to a strike called against one or more members of their group after an impasse in negotiations for a master contract.Although such a lockout may raise anti-trust questions, 2 as well as questions under the Taft-Hartley Act, recent litigation has arisen exclusively under the Taft-Hartley Act.This litigation has made only one thing clear: The NLRB, according to the reviewing courts, is always wrong.Thus the initial position taken by a majority of the Board (pre-Eisenhower), that defensive lockouts are illegal under the Taft-Hartley Act, was rejected by the courts of appeals in three circuits.3 A new
Loading…
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.