Relationship Between Free Choice and Labor Board Doctrine: Differing Empirical Approaches, 79 Northwestern University Law Review 721 (1984)
In Union Representation Elections: Law and Reality [hereinafter cited as Law and Reality], we examined the desirability of continued National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) regulation of pre-election campaigning. Our central finding, based upon a study of thirty-one elections and interviews with over a thousand employees, was that unlawful campaigning has no greater effect on employee voting behavior in union representation elections than does lawful campaigning. Hence, we recommended that the Board should no longer attempt to distinguish between lawful and unlawful campaigning; that the results of an election, once conducted, should be final; that speech should be wholly free; and that the Board should neither set aside elections nor find unfair labor practices based on oral or written communications by an employer or a union.
Date of Authorship for this Version
National Labor Relations Board, elections, labor
Getman, Julius G.; Goldberg, Stephen B.; and Brett, Jeanne M., "Relationship Between Free Choice and Labor Board Doctrine: Differing Empirical Approaches" (1984). Faculty Scholarship Series. 4399.