About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

22 A.B.A. J. 245 (1936)
The National Labor Relations Act

handle is hein.journals/abaj22 and id is 251 raw text is: THE NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS ACT The Act Codifies Principles Which Were Sketched in Broadest Outline in the National Industrial Recovery Act and Developed in the Administration under It-The Nature of the Act-Precedents for It-Constitutional Questions Involved-Schechter Decision Probably Confines Application of Act to Businesses Directly Interstate in Char- acter-Application of Fifth Amendment-The Public Interest-Essential Purpose of the Measure, etc. By HENRY P. CHANDLER Member of the Chicago, Illinois, Bar LTHOUGH the depression was not the cause of the National Labor Relations Act, which is de- signed as a permanent policy, the depression oc- casioned it. The act codifies principles which were sketched in broadest outline in the National In- dustrial Recovery Act, and developed in the ad- ministration under it. Consideration of the present act begins logically with the National Industrial Recovery Act. Section 7(a)' provided that every code of fair competition under the act should contain the fol- lowing conditions: (1) That employees should have the right to organ- ize and bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing and should be free from the inter- ference of employers in the designation of such representa- tives or in self-organization or other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. (2) That no employee or person seeking employment should be required as a condition of employment to join any company union or refrain from joining a labor organ- ization of his own choosing. The ends in view in such a policy are to match the unity of employers with organizations of employees, who otherwise are divided; to further peace by bringing the impulse of employees to unite under the protection of the law; and through increasing the efficiency of employees' organization, to raise wages and thus increase purchasing power and ex- pand the market for the products of industry. These aims were generally declared in Section 1 of the National Industrial Recovery Act,2 which stated the following objectives among others: to induce and maintain united action of labor and management under adequate governmental sanctions and supervision***, to increase the consumption of industrial and agricultural products by increasing purchasing power, to reduce and relieve unemployment, to improve stand- ards of labor. The labor provisions of the National Industrial Recovery Act were interpreted by various adminis- trative boards, principally the National Labor Board and following it the National Labor Rela- tions Board. The work of the former which was composed of eminent representatives of capital' and labor4 under the chairmanship of Senator Wagner 1. 48 Stat. at L. 198-199. 2. 48 Stat. at L. 195. 3. Among employers were Mr. Teagle of the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey, Mr. Swope of the General Elec- tric Company, and Mr. Pierre S. du Pont. 4. Among labor leaders were Mr. Green, President of the American Federation of Labor and Mr. Lewis, President of the United Mine Workers of America. of New York, was largely in the nature of media- tion.' But as time went on the National Labor Board was given power to pass upon complaints of violation of Section 7(a)', and rendered decisions upon the legal effect of the act.' The National Labor Relations Board,' which was appointed in June 1934 and functioned until June 1935, carried the process 'of interpretation much farther, developing what has been termed a common law' of labor relations. Sitting as an administrative tribunal, and hearing on appeal from the regional boards complaints of all kinds concern- ing alleged violations of Section 7(a) by employers, the Board built up a body of precedents under the statute that, whether approved or not, are logical, consistent and well reasoned. The most important principles laid down are these: (1) That employers must not discriminate against members of unions or interfere with their lawful activities as members in any way.° (2) That employers must not seek to promote company unions by financial support or otherwise but must keep hands off the organization of their employees. (3) That employers must recognize the per- sons selected by the majority of their employees as their agents for purposes of collective bargaining although they are representatives of labor unions and not employees in the plant. (4) That employers must recognize the repre- 5. Spencer, Collective Bargaining under Section 7(a) of the National Industrial Recovery Act, 9. 6. Executive Order of February 23, 1934, No. 6612A. 7. These decisions are published in two pamphlets, one for the period, August 1933-March 1934, and one for the period, April 1934-July 1934. 8. The Board consisted first of Lloyd K. Garrison, Dean of the Law School of the University of Wisconsin, chairman, Harry A. Millis, Professor of Economics of the University of Chicago and Edwin S. Smith, former commissioner of Labor and Industries of Massachusetts, members. Mr. Garrison re- signed in the fall of 1934 to resume his academic duties, and was succeeded by Mr. Francis Biddle, able lawyer of Phila- delphia. 9. Labor Relations Boards, published by the Brookings Institution, 446. 10. In the matter of the Kawneer Company, Decisions of National Labor Relations Board, Vol. 1 60, In the matter of Zenith Radio Corporation, id. 202, In the matter of Available Truck Company, id. Vol. II 68. 11. In the matter of Ames Baldwin Wyoming Company, Decisions of National Labor Relations Board, Vol. I 68, In the matter of The Kohler Company, id. 72, In the matter of Ely & Walker Dry Goods Company, id. 94, In the matter of Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, id. 173, In the matter of Danbury and Bethel Fur Company, id. 195. 12. In the matter of Berkeley Woolen Mills, Decisions

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most