Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Case holds key to U.S. competitiveness; NLRB to rule on legality of labor-management committees

Article Abstract:

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) will soon rule on the legality of labor-management committees. The issue is whether such committees constitute a 'labor organization,' an entity unlawfully dominated by management, under the National Labor Relations Act of 1935. Labor unions view such committees as management efforts to increase control, tie jobs to profitability and jeopardize the unions' existence. To employers they are a way to communicate with workers.

Author: Samborn, Randall
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1992
Cases, Participatory management, Unfair labor practices

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


NLRB asks public for input on rules

Article Abstract:

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) announced Mar 5, 1992, that it desires public comment on two proposed rule changes. The board is considering defining the duties of unions with regard to the spending of agency fees, as guided by the Supreme Court's decision in Communications Workers of America v Beck. The NLRB is also considering whether interest on back pay awards should be compounded daily, rather than the present system of simple interest calculation.

Author: Samborn, Randall
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1992
Laws, regulations and rules, Wages, Wages and salaries

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Derailing the rules; unusual coalition tries last-ditch effort to halt civil discovery reform

Article Abstract:

A varied coalition is lobbying against discovery reform proposals now before the Senate. The strongest opposition is concentrated on the proposed amendment of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26, which mandates that parties exchange core information prior to the start of discovery. Opponents argue that rather than streamline discovery, the proposed amendment adds another pretrial process.

Author: Samborn, Randall
Publisher: ALM Media, Inc.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1993
Innovations, Prevention, Discovery (Law), Court congestion and delay, Court delay

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: Labor unions
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Survey of 92 key companies using ADR to settle employment disputes. Just cause in the arbitration of sexual harassment cases
  • Abstracts: Counsel in Marvel case knocked out; Del. court adopts strict rule on debtor-creditor conflicts. Lawyer indicted in sting
  • Abstracts: Sears reps practiced law illegally; but using real lawyers in credit card debt sessions might be too expensive
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.