Successorship and labor obligations

Article Abstract:

The National Labor Relations Board has ruled that employers who purchase unionized businesses are obligated to honor the existing union contract if the collective bargaining agreement is assumed by the purchaser under the terms of sale. Individual settlements with the employees are not recognized if the settlements bypass the union bargaining agreement assumed upon purchase. Employers who purchase businesses that are in the middle of a strike must also bargain with the union if the preceding owners commit unfair labor practices, such as refusing the union access to financial records, because the unfair labor charges convert the strike from an economic strike to an unfair labor practice strike. In a related case, however, a federal court ruled that successors are not liable for Title VII discrimination cases filed against the predecessors, if the successor has no knowledge of the suit.

Economic aspects, United States. National Labor Relations Board, Employee promotions, Collective labor agreements

---

AIDS update: employer obligations and rights

Article Abstract:

Three recent court decisions have delineated some of the responsibilities employers have in dealing with workers suffering from acquired immune deficiency syndrome (AIDS). One decision stipulates that employers cannot fire employees simply because they may have AIDS because AIDS has been found to be a physical handicap under California law. Another decision stipulates that AIDS testing was not reasonable under standards of the Fourth Amendment. A third decision reveals that a decision of a hospital which fired a nurse for insubordination is legal. The worker did not want to submit to an AIDS test and charged that he was fired because the hospital thought he was 'handicapped', but the court found the hospital had a right to require testing in order to protect co-workers and patients.

Work environment, AIDS (Disease), AIDS (Disease) in the workplace

---

Pregnancy obligations clarified further

Article Abstract:

Several recent cases before the Supreme Court have further clarified the obligations that employers have towards workers who apply for maternity leave. The rules established in the cases cited are: employers must make every reasonable effort to return an employee to the same, or a similar, position held by the employee prior to taking the leave; all employees who take leaves of absence, for whatever reason, should be treated consistently; and the states are free to pass any legislation in the area of pregnancy and employment, as long as the legislation does not result in discrimination. The cases from which these rules are derived are cited and discussed briefly.

Courts, Cases, Employee benefits, United States. Supreme Court, Maternity benefits

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Statutory Exclusions and Exceptions. Enforcement By Statutory Commissions
• Abstracts: OSHA issues final rule on bloodborne pathogens. 'Comparable worth' claims rejected. Age-based discrimination: economic and seniority factors
• Abstracts: Rules for management communication. How managers create monsters. Two-sided performance reviews
• Abstracts: Richard Newton: head of human resources, BP Group. Michael Obsaldeston. A disability course that turns the tables

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.