In the previous video, I talked about some key aspects of US labor law. In this video, we turn our attention to what's called in the United States, US labor law. Labor law deals with the rights of workers as groups. I want to start by making sure that you don't share an important misconception. US labor law is not the law of labor unions, such that only managers in unionized situations need to pay attention. Rather, US labor law is broadly covering the law of union, and what I'll call union-like activity. So whenever workers are banding together to influence working conditions, that's considered union-like activity, and that's covered by US labor law, even in non-union environments. So for example, as a manager it's illegal for you to stop your employees from talking with each other about their compensation. Why? Because it's employees joining together to try to influence their conditions. That's considered union-like activity and that is covered by US labor law, again, even in a non-union environment. So all of you non-union managers, you still need to pay attention. The birth of US labor laws trace back into the great labor strife of the late 1800s. This picture depicts a railroad strike in the late 1870s, and you can see the massive destruction that occurred. And since railroads were so critical for interstate commerce, there were legislative attempts to try to bring labor peace to that industry. Fast forward several decades into the great depression, the 1930s. This was another period marked by great labor conflict, and so labor law again comes to the fore, and this time, national labor legislation was really enacted. And again, labor peace was a key goal of that labor legislation movement. Now there's another reason for passing labor law in the Great Depression and that was to try to improve the situation of workers. Poverty was widespread, workers were having a hard time supporting their families. Here's a picture of bread lines during the Great Depression. And so another goal of labor law Is to raise labor's purchasing power via collective action. This is seen as benefiting not only workers so that they can support their families better, it's also seen as potentially benefiting the economy because it can boost labor's purchasing power. So today, US labor law protects workers who join together to increase their bargaining power and to exercise voice in their workplace. Again, it doesn't mean that they have to be trying to form a union. It doesn't mean collective bargaining per se. But any types of activities where they're joining together to try to exercise voice in the workplace, influence their terms and conditions of employment is covered by US labor law. Again, even in non-union situations. Now, against the backdrop of trying to achieve labor peace, another key aspect of labor law is to provide orderly procedures so that unions don't, and workers don't resort to strikes and picketing and other types of disruptive activities. Labor law provides for orderly procedures for determining when a union represents a majority of the workers in that workplace. And lastly when workers are, when unions are certified as representing a majority of the workers, managers are obligated to bargain in good faith with those unions. So what's one key takeaway for non-union managers? You cannot terminate or otherwise punish workers who are banding together to try to form a union, but again, it's not limited to situations that explicitly deal with unionization. Any time workers are joining together collectively to have an influence over their wages, hours, terms and conditions of employment, that's union-like activity covered by labor law in the United States. So in a non-union workplace then, suppose you face this scenario. Suppose you want to implement a new pay-for-performance program, five employees together decide to refuse to work until the program is withdrawn. Can you fire the employees? No. This is an example of employees banding together to try to influence their terms and conditions of employment. You don't have to continue to pay them while they're not working, but you can't fire them. That's protected under labor law. Consider another scenario. Again, in a non-union workplace, you're interviewing a new applicant for a new web designer position. You notice that a very qualified applicant comes to her job interview with a union day planner and a union pen. You don't want any troublemakers in your organization. Based on that, can you refuse to hire this worker? No. You cannot discriminate against individuals on the basis of union support. Again, even in a non-union environment. Consider a third and final scenario, again in a non-union situation. You want to change your company's healthcare insurance provider. But you wanna solicit employee opinions and see what they think about this before making this change. So you hand pick an employee committee to represent the other employees in discussions about new health insurance options. Would this run into problems under US labor law? Yes. Is it legal to do this? No. Now this might seem odd. You're just trying to talk with your employees and get their views on something that affects them. However, when you're asking employees to represent one another rather than just speaking as individuals, this becomes something like a union, and it's illegal for managers to interfere with even this very simple or basic form of unionism. Again, there's no formal union involved here, but it's still covered by US labor law. Now, just quickly, I wanna emphasize that there's a difference between labor law that covers private sector organizations and labor law that covers government organizations in the public sector, be it local, county, state or federal employees. The labor law that primarily been talking about especially that comes out of the Great Depression covers private sector employees across the entire country. So, the protections for workers in the private sector established uniformly across the entire country. This is very different for government workers. Laws vary for state-to-state, some states in fact don't even have a law covering unionization for local, county, and state government workers in that state. So while in the private sector, all companies have an obligation to bargain with a union when it represents the majority of the employees, in the public sector it can be very different. And there are some workers in the public sector who lacked this protection. So there are some agencies, local governments that don't have to bargain with the union. It really depends on the state that you're in, whether or not there's a bargaining law, and how comprehensive that bargaining law is. However, this doesn't mean that those public sector workers lack protection. It doesn't mean that you can discriminate against works in those situations, because, as a government agency, it would be a violation of the Constitution to prevent workers from talking with one another. You don't have to bargain with them, but don't discriminate against them. Another quick difference, last difference between private sector labor law and public sector labor law, is that in the private sector there's a fairly broad right to strike. It's not an unlimited right to strike, but a fairly broad right to strike. Whereas in the public sector, again it really depends on the nature of legislation in your state, and whether workers are covered. Many workers, especially in essential services, like police or fire, even in a state that gives those employees the right to bargain, they don't have the right to strike. So, labor law is important for all managers, not just managers in unionized situations, not just managers in the private sector but all managers. Private sector, public sector, union, non-union. All managers need to respect worker's rights to form unions and perhaps even more importantly for non-union managers, you need to recognize that labor law protects what I'm calling, union-like activity. So if workers want to talk with each other about their compensation, you cannot discriminate against them. You cannot shut that conversation down. You cannot take any reprisals against them. That's a violation of labor law. And so all managers need to recognize these types of collective activities, that they're protected by US labor law and don't interfere with workers engaged in those activities.
