The Wagner Act Essay Example for Free

The Wagner Act Essay Prior to the enactment of the Wagner Act, the United States already had several labors. The Railway Labor Act, which was passed in 1926, required employers to enter into collective bargaining agreements with unions. It also prohibited discrimination on the part of the company against the unions. The RLA however, only applied to railroads and was subsequently amended in order for airlines to be included. Thus during this period, while it was legal to form unions, companies were not prohibited from firing employees for being union members. In 1993, at the behest of then President Franklin Roosevelt, the National Industry Recovery Act was passed. Among the provisions, specifically Section 7(a), employees were not only given the right to form unions but that joining or non-joining of a union would not be used as a requirement for employment. That particular section also required companies to abide by conditions of employment such as the number of work hours and minimum wage as set by the President. However, the Act came under fire due to concerns of its effectiveness as was eventually overturned by the Supreme Court in May 1935. In order to address the issue of employers and unions, the Wagner Act or the National Labor Relations Act was passed in 1935. Named after its proponent, Sen. Robert F. Wagner, the Act incorporated Section 7(a) of the former NIRA. This particular section became the pillar of the Wagner Act. Aside from giving employees the right to form unions, the Wagner Act also defined what it considered as unfair labor practice by an employer. Under Section 8, an employer is said to have committed unfair labor practice if it: interferes, restraints or coerces an employee from joining, dominates or interferes in the formation of a union, discriminates an employee for being part of a union, seeks reprisal against an employees for filing unfair labor practice charges, and refuses to enter into a collective bargaining agreement with the unions. With the passing of the Wagner Act, two important things happened. First, membership in unions began to increase dramatically. From a mere 10% prior to the act, more than 30% of the total US workforce became union members by the 1950s. The second was the formation of the National Labor Relations Board. The NLRB is the agency that is tasked with overseeing the implementation of the Act. By approving the Wagner Act, it was seen that the government was ready to go against the private sector by giving employees the right to form unions and enter into collective bargaining agreements. All these however changed after World War II. As a result of the war, certain groups raised the issue of balancing the power enjoyed by both the labor sector and the companies. Thus in 1947, the Labor-Management Relations Act or Taft-Hartley Act was passed. The Taft-Hartley Act is considered as an amended to the Wagner Act. Although the Taft-Hartley Act retained some of the provisions of the Wagner Act there were also some changes implemented.   Notable changes include the delay or suspension of a strike if it would lead to a national emergency situation. The act also excluded employees who were at the supervisory level from being covered by the provisions of the Wagner Act. A closed shop or a company that hires only union members was also banned. The Taft-Hartley act also protected non-union members from being discriminated by union shops. A union shop is a company that although allows non-union employees to join, eventually requires these employees to eventually join a union. While maintaining the list of unfair labor practice by employers stated in the Wagner Act, the Taft-Hartley Act now included a list of unfair labor practices by unions.   Among others, the amendment required unions to give a 60 days notice to mediators of a planned strike and enter into good faith negotiations with employers. The Taft-Hartley Act further protected employers from facing reprisals from unions if it expressed adverse opinions against the unions. The Act also made it illegal for companies to practice featherbedding. That is, forcing employers pay certain individuals wages despite doing no work. Under the amendment, the primary functions of the NLRB was now to prevent and find solutions to unfair labor practices that is by either the employers or the unions.   The NLRB was also tasked to determine if employees prefer to be represented by union for the purpose of conducting collective bargaining with the company. Currently, the NLRB is divided into two sectors. The Board, which is composed of five individuals, has the task of deciding on cases based on records under administrative proceedings. The General Counsel on the other hand, is in charge of investigating and prosecuting unfair labor practice cases. The General Counsel is also the group tasked to supervise the processing of cases in the field offices. The Board and General Counsel is independent of each other. Another law worth mentioning is the Landrum-Griffin Act or the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959. While it did not make sweeping changes like the Taft-Hartley, it nevertheless amended the Wagner Act by including additional unfair labor practices not included in the Taft-Hartley. The idea behind the Landrum-Griffin Act was to give further protection to the union members from their leaders. The Landrum-Griffin Act enabled a more open selection of union leaders. It also gave members the right to file legal charges against the union without fear of reprisal. While it is clear that the three laws mentioned are pro-labor, the passing of the Taft-Hartley Act tilted the scales somewhat in favor of the employers. However, membership in unions continued to increase despite the passage of the Taft-Hartley Act mainly because of the protection afforded by these laws. As seen from the laws that have been passed, the focus has always been on the employees. While the Wagner Act curtailed the abuses likely to be done by the companies, the Taft-Hartley Act restrained unions from becoming abusive and becoming a much bigger problem. The Landrum-Griffin Act effectively gave back the power of the union to its members and served as a warning for union leaders to ensure that their interests is in line with the general membership. While some sectors are saying that it may be time to repeal or amend these laws, particularly the Taft-Hartley Act, such a decision may not be good for now. While union membership may not be as high as it was before, the reason may not be entirely because of the provisions set forth in these laws. Currently, the labor force of the US is facing competitions form automation and outsourcing. Most companies nowadays prefer to use labor from countries outside the US since the wages are cheaper and the labor laws are lenient compared to those in the country. While the law encourages employers and unions to discuss collective bargaining agreements, it does not prevent companies from laying-off employees in the event of a financial problem. The labor union in the US has come a long way in order to be where it is right now. The laws, first and foremost, have always been there in order to protect the workers and ensure good working conditions. Union leaders should make good use of the provisions under the law. The Wagner Act and its amendments, the Taft-Hartley Act and Landrum-Griffin Act, were not enacted for aesthetic purposes. Unions should remind employers on why it was enacted in the first place. References National Labor Relations Act. National Labor Relations Board. 14 April 2008. http://www.nlrb.gov/about_us/overview/national_labor_relations_act.aspx