“Neutrality” and “card check” agreements: Union assaults on employee rights and the integrity of the national labor relations board

Employer “neutrality” and union recognition by “card check” are tools unions use to bolster their shrinking numbers. Employee freeinformed choice and the sanctity of a democratic, secretballot National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) election are the casualties of this fast-track approach to organizing. The NLRB is faced with challenging issues about some of the agreements which may overreach legal boundaries. This paper addresses those issues and highlights pending NLRB cases which may resolve some of them.     

The changing character of strikes involving permanent striker replacements, 1935–1990

Using NLRB cases reporting hiring of striker replacements, I provide a longitudinal analysis of 165 strikes from 1935–1990. Strikes since 1981 most closely resembled strikes occurring from 1938–1947: They lasted longer and involved more strikers and more replacements than strikes in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s. Interestingly, NLRB disposition of employer unfair labor practice charges remained fairly constant throughout the 55 years analyzed and overwhelmingly favored unions. Although my findings are preliminary, they suggest that more empirical analysis of replacement strikes is warranted. I also suggest how some existing strike models can be readily adapted to explain replacement strike phenomena. I thank Stephanie Mason and Brian Dilley for their research assistance and an anonymous referee for insightful suggestions.     

Equity market response to union decertification petitions and elections

The effect of union decertification elections on the valuation of corporations is examined using a standard event study methodology. Cumulative abnormal daily common stock returns for 203 NYSE and AMEX listed firms are estimated for the day on which a petition for a decertification election is filed and for the day on which the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) certifies the decertification election outcome. The results are consistent with the hypothesis that successful union decertifications increase firm valuation and unsuccessful ones reduce firm valuation. The primary carrier of valuation information is the date the NLRB confirms the decertification election results. The petition file date yields little, if any, information about the firm’s capitalization. The authors thank the directors of the regional NLRB offices and the editor of this journal for their assistance. The usual caveats concerning errors and omissions apply. Correspondence should be directed to William L. Huth.     

South/non-south differentials in national labor relations board certification election outcomes: Comment

A recent study of National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) certification elections concluded that there are no regional differences in the probability of unionization. This paper suggests that it is inappropriate to draw such broad inferences from NLRB data, since elections occur only where an initial preference for unionism has been expressed. Using a national data set on private sector hospitals, we demonstrate that Southern location significantly reduces the probability of having an election and the probability of negotiating a collective bargaining agreement, but it does not affect the probability of a union election victory. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of the authors’ institutions. We would like to thank Peter Feuille and James Kuhn for helpful comments on an earlier version of this paper.     

Congress and the National Labor Relations Board: A review of the recent past

Concusion The evidence indicates that Congress has beem very active in monitoring and attempting to influence the NLRB. Although this has always been the case, the political environment of the Board has become even more unsettled since the late 1970s. The confirmation and appropriations processes havebecome at times extremely difficult with earlier regimes, memebers of Congress also seen quite willing to express their views directly to the Board, even on cases under review.     

Information,disinformation, and union success in certification and decertification elections

In certification elections, workers consider the purchase of union services whose quality is, ex ante, unobservable. Voters must rely on available signals or indices in forming their expectations. Union members are able to reevaluate their initial purchase decision as more accurate information is obtained through experience. Therefore, participants in decertification elections rely less on sources of imperfect information. Using NLRB data over the period 1966 to 1990, we find evidence consistent with information-related distinctions between the certification and decertification decisions. Our study provides a useful framework for understanding the observed differences between these two types of elections. This research was funded through the Illinois State University Research Grant Program.     

The formation and administration of labor policy by the NLRB: Evidence from economic and ULP strike rulings

Conclusion and Implications My result cast doubt on normative assessment of NLRB performance. To illustrate, Gross concludes that the Dotson Board’sdecisions caused the labor movement to atrophy. If the Dotson Board ruled for unions in roughly the same proportion of striker replacement cases as the Gould Board, however, Gross’ conclusion is questionable.     

South-nonsouth differentials in National Labor Relations Board certification election outcomes

This paper investigates and evaluates the magnitude of regional differentials in outcomes in National Labor Relations Board elections. The data for this project include NLRB elections conducted during the period 1973–1978. The author wishes to thank Steven Hills, Michael Borus, Gil Nestel and Kezia Sproat of the Center for Human Resource Research for their comments on an earlier draft of this paper.     

Union Salting: Reactions and Rulings since Town and Country

In a difficult organizing environment, unions have adopted growth strategies including organizing for recognition and bypassing the NLRB election process -- a top-down approach. Union salting has become a popular tool toward achieving that goal particularly among the building trades unions. I examine labor's thrust at the top-down approach toward organizing the workplace using the "salting" strategy, employer reactions to salting, and the pattern of rulings coming from the National Labor Relations Board since the seminal Supreme Court case on salting, NLRB v. Town &; Country Electric (1995).     

Is the NLRB still relevant? A performance review

Conclusions Comparisons of the NLRB to dinosaurs and other extinct species, fallen empires, and other relics are overdone. Nevertheless, the Board must confront some worrisome signs of institutional decay. On very separate fronts federal courts and state legislatures- the Board's ULP jurisdiction is eroding. Even more troubling for the Board, these incursions are coming from different sources. Unions seem to be winning the battle to legislate protective labor standards when the collective bargaining process that is administered by the NLRB fails them. Individual employees, and by extension certain employers, are circumventing the Board's ability to define fundamental issues of union membership.     

Union salting: Reactions and rulings since <Emphasis Type="Italic">Town and Country</Emphasis>

In a difficult organizing environment, unions have adopted growth strategies including organizing for recognition and bypassing the NLRB election process-a top-down approach. Union salting has become a popular tool toward achieving that goal particularly among the building trades unions. I examine labor’s thrust at the top-down approach toward organizing the workplace using the “salting” strategy, employer reactions to salting, and the pattern of rulings coming from the National Labor Relations Board since the seminal Supreme Court case on salting, NLRB v. Town & Country Electric (1995).     

A probit model of NLRB bargaining order cases in the appellate courts

This study examines NLRB bargaining orders that have gone to appeals courts and ascertains what factors influence whether or not the order is enforced and to what degree these factors influence the likelihood of enforcement. Substantial information has been collected from each reported appellate decision that reviewed NLRB bargaining orders issued over a four-year period. A probit regression model is employed to examine whether factors related to an employer’s unfair labor practice campaign are involved in the circuit court’s enforcement decisions or if more weight is given to unrelated factors, such as the circuit in which the appeal is heard or the amount of judicial delay involved in the appeals process. Funding for this research was supported by NSF Grant SES-86-18517.     

The role of management attorneys in union organizing campaigns

We examine the role and effect of management attorneys in union organizing campaigns by conducting in-depth interviews with a number of management and union attorneys, union organizers, and NLRB administrators. Hypotheses are developed for future empirical testing.     

Majority voting rules and the union success rate in national labor relations board representation elections

This paper simulates how the union success rate in representation elections would be affected if the NLRB reverted from its current simple-majority voting rule to its original majority-in-unit voting rule. Such a rule change would have altered 21 percent of decertification and 16 percent of certification victories over the period 1977–81, resulting in the loss of 180,400 actual or potential bargaining unit members for the union movement. Abstentions play an important role in election outcomes. Under the present voting rule unions have no clear advantage to “get out the vote” in decertification elections, but a clear disadvantage in certification elections. Under a majority-in-unit rule unions hold an advantage when they “get out the vote” in all representation elections. I would like to thank Mike Bognanno, Jim Dworkin, Paul Schumann, two reviewers, and the editor for helpful comments and David Wilson for excellent research assistance. I would also like to thank the NLRB for providing the election data tape.     

The effect of voting procedures on union representation elections: The multi-union case

Public choice theorists have shown that choice of voting procedures may affect the outcome when more than two alternatives are on a ballot. The run-off election and the two-part ballot are two alternatives used in representation elections involving more than one union. A comparison of these alternatives under various voting strategies shows that the run-off election used by the NLRB results in fewer union wins if workers vote sincerely or if they engage in strategic behavior. The run-off procedure results in more union wins if workers seek to avoid their least-favored option or if they follow a second-best strategy.     

Review essay — administrative delay at the NLRB: Some modest proposals

V. Conclusion The latest edition of Miller’s Appraisal provides an updated glimpse into the inner workings of the NLRB. Miller’s observations are knowledgeable and understandable, and his book is an important contribution for academics, the labor bar, and the Board itself. We hope it spurs further study of the Board’s administration of the Act and exploration of ways to improve it. Miller’s pessimism about potential reforms, short of his proposed abolition of the five-member Board in favor of a new labor and employment division of the federal district courts, goes too far. We have suggested a few changes that would make the Board more efficient without affecting the Board’s substantive mission. Hopefully, with further efforts like Miller’s in the future, the Board will effect a consistent improvement upon its somewhat spotty record of efficiency and will keep the NLRA vibrant well into this new century. We especially thank former NLRB Regional Director Daniel Silverman for his invaluable contributions to this article.     

Representation type and union success in certification elections

Many different variables have been used to predict union certification election success; however, none of the studies has explored the impact of representation type. Using NLRB election data for the period from April 1980 through September 1990, we found that affiliation of a local union with the AFL-CIO was detrimental to the success rate of unions in single union and contested certification elections. We offer preliminary interpretations based on fundamental economic themes often applied to collective choice and conclude with implications for union organizing policy. The authors thank Michael Nelson for helpful suggestions and Matthew Harris for research assistance.     

The changing scope of union organizing

This paper presents a profile of the change in the scope of union organizing and provides empirical support for the numerous observations about the declining importance of jurisdictions in the selection of organizing targets. The scope of organizing is measured in terms of the distributions of the NLRB certification elections of 18 selected unions for 1973–1975 and 1983–1985. Diversity and concentration in organizing and its impact on election outcome are examined. The authors thank Azia Merchant for his assistance.     

Determinants of the decertification process: Evidence from employer-initiated elections

There have been relatively few studies on why workers choose to decertify a union as their bargaining unit and virtually no empirical studies on the outcomes of employer-initiated representation elections. Using data from the NLRB monthly election reports (1977–1981), we attempt to analyze the factors that seem to influence the outcomes of employer-initiated representation elections with an incumbent union. Variables in our analysis include size of the election unit, region, industrial classification, type of incumbent union, and the state of the local economy. While the data show a concentration of elections on the West Coast, there is no significant difference in the ability of unions there to “win” decertification elections.     

State of the unions: Assessment by elite American labor leaders

One hundred and sixty-four elite union leaders in the United States completed a survey to assess the condition of the American labor movement and the factors affecting it. The respondents included high-level international union and state federation officers, central labor presidents, and 58 shop stewards. This study compares the responses of these labor officials and finds that they have similar, negative assessments of the condition of the American labor movement. The study also finds that these leaders agree that the most important factors affecting the labor movement are collective bargaining rights, union leadership, union member solidarity, and the NLRB.