A Quantitative Study of Unfair Labor Practice Cases

The number of charges of unfair labor practices filed with the National Labor Relations Board has grown steadily. This article analyzes the incidence of case filings since 1952 as a function of economic variables, such as the unemployment rate and changes in the price level; the number of strikes an...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Industrial & labor relations review 1981-01, Vol.34 (2), p.245-256
Main Author: Roomkin, Myron
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Administrative agencies
ARBITRATION
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
Economic regulation
Employment
Frequency
GOVERNMENT-INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
Labor law
Labor legislation
Labor management relations
Labor regulations
Labor relations
LABOR UNIONS (BUT NOT GUILDS)
Litigation
MANAGERS AND MANAGEMENT
MODELING, MODELS
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD
ORGANIZATION BEHAVIOR
ORGANIZATION THEORY
Political parties
Price level changes
QUANTIFICATION
REGULATION & REGULATORY POLICY
Statistical Data
Studies
Unemployment
Unfair labor practices
US POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS, PROCESSES & BEHAVIOR
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The number of charges of unfair labor practices filed with the National Labor Relations Board has grown steadily. This article analyzes the incidence of case filings since 1952 as a function of economic variables, such as the unemployment rate and changes in the price level; the number of strikes and representation petitions filed, since both tend to produce litigation; and aspects of the Board's administrative processes that tend to encourage or discourage case filings, such as the extent of delay. The study finds that, contrary to the assumptions of national labor policy, the Board's activities themselves may be an important determinant of union and employer demands for regulatory intervention. The model proves less satisfactory, however, in explaining the filing behavior of individuals, suggesting that workers have unrealistic expectations about the protection offered them by the National Labor Relations Act.
ISSN:0019-7939
2162-271X
DOI:10.1177/001979398103400206