Historical and legal framework, which provides the foundations for the American system of labor / management relations
The current system of American labor relations and laws has undergone significant transformation dating back to the Great Depression. During the 1930s, the relationship between employers and employees were purely casual in nature. For instance, no employee was guaranteed of long-term job security. Employees lacked bargaining powers because employment was marked by short-term contract with limited paperwork. After the Great Depression, a legal framework relating to the implicit contracts between employers and employees was established. After the Second World War and up to the 1960s, a comprehensive and enforceable legal relationship between employers and employees had been established. This was a recipe of the current labor relation in the U.S. (Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 2011).
The 1960s were the turning point of the current labor relations in the U.S. this period is marked by the comprehensive and detailed establishment of government labor policies. These policies were sensitive to the labor market conditions in shaping worker's employment. Prior to this, the Fair Labor Standards Act had to be established in 1938 because the government did have much control of the American workplace. This Act saw the influx of women into the workplace with guaranteed legal protection. Minimum hourly wage and overtime compensation were also enforced (Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 2011).
The NLRA of 1935 created a situation where employers could bargain with employees about their wages as an obligation. Eventually, the "at-will" and "regulation-free" sectors were established where labor laws were to be applied. Employees had the prerogative of choosing the sectors in which they wanted to work. Significant strides were made when the unionized sector was established. This is still applicable up-to-date because employees are subjected to the federal statute (NLRA) and the National Labor Relations Board. Such laws are essential because they protect employees from unfair labor practices. Employee bargaining powers are also emphasized whilst empowering them to strike when unfairly treated by employees.
In the next fifty years up to 2000s, the legal framework has changed significantly. The "at-will" rule has almost lost its meaning while the unionized sector has prevailed. The presence of the government in the labor industry is noteworthy. The workplace is subject to various laws from the federal, the state, legislature, and the judiciary. It is important to note that the growing government participation saw the decline in the number of labor unions, unlike the 1950s/60s. Some of the reasons that might have contributed to this development may include the changing workforce composition, the new global economy that encourages competition, and the increase in contingent workforce (Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 2011).
As part of the efforts to strengthen the unionized sector with the declined of the at-will rule, some statutory regulations were established. They include the OSH Act, WARN Act, and Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA). However, employee interests are currently under threat because of increased capital mobility and short-term work arrangements. The existing regime although plausible has its deficiencies in protecting employees' rights. The limitations include the skewed litigation model of resolving termination disputes, time wastage when resolving a labor relations dispute, the existence of a non-uniform termination standard, and a deficient NLRA law. Evidently, further reforms in the labor laws characterized by holistic reformulation are essential. This will reflect the actualities of the contemporary working environment (Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 2011).
The actions of unions and management to determine basic compliance with the major U.S. Federal labor laws
The action of complying with the U.S. Federal labor laws must be fulfilled in various growth and development networks all over the country. The country's existence has ensured that the existing U.S. Federal labor laws have formulated implementation approaches in advance. The unions ensure that they make use of the Federal labor laws in managing employee salaries and remunerations. The federal labor laws have some worker considerations and paradigms articulating the level of required employee payments (Melik, 2007). For this reason, the unions through its workers sought a solid approach to relay the best options of management in the region. The labor unions carry out their primary function of standardizing wages to match the Fair Labor Standards. Wages have to be regulated with the rights of the union workers together with the trending situations and industry characteristics. In most cases, the unions have managed to make suitable strategies in order to determine the most appropriate levels of wages all workers. In the desire to enhance service delivery to its clients (employees), labor unions have had to re-invent their management styles and departments as the federal labor laws demand. Therefore, U.S. Federal labor laws under the jurisdiction of the federal governments establish structures where the management of workers can be improved (Twomey, 2009).
The unions have to strive for better terms of service concerning the pension schemes in the country. This is done through the Employee Retirement Income Security as stipulated in the Federal labor laws. This fragment of the law establishes a situation where the essential modes of funding and other pension operations in the unions are facilitated. Through the intervention of the U.S. Federal labor laws, employees and their employers can benefit heavily. The unions have used most state legislations in order to establish the best ways of creating professional human relations in the country. Acts of discrimination and outward handling of the employees are eradicated from the unions by quoting the actions and statements of the U.S. Federal labor laws and EEOC. In most cases, it has become a common norm for the unions to create equitable rights of pensions and pension schemes for workers in all states. Such an approach has been adopted by many other countries because of the success seen in the U.S. (Twomey, 2009).
The health and safety status of many unions is handled by the existence and functionalism of the U.S. Federal labor laws. Through the Occupational Safety and Health Act found in the federal labor laws, many organizations strive for the betterment of the health and safety standards in all their departments. In most cases, many organizations focus on managing the states of work and growth without having enough attention on the state of health and safety of their workers (Mathis & Jackson, 2010). As indicated in leadership structures within the federal labor laws, unions and other organizational groups must strive to establish appropriate workplace environments. As indicated in many sectors dealing with workers' rights, health and safety are part of the necessary measures that have to be considered and instituted (Melik, 2007).
The available infrastructures must be readily available in providing the best options of service delivery and workplace safety. Labor laws require employers to guarantee maximum safety to all employees when undertaking their duties at the work places. Many organizations around the globe have embraced this concept as a facet of success. The FML Act was also established in 1963 as part of the efforts of improving employee rights in the workplace. The unions use this act in order to attain the best levels of service delivery to individuals with families. The U.S. Federal labor laws within this act appreciate and safeguards their needs relating to health and safety (Mathis & Jackson, 2010).
The contracts of employment within many unions and organizations are subject to the existence of the different laws in the region. In the United States of America, it has become very crucial in the contractual terms to be made public and within the premise of the U.S. Federal labor laws. The safety of the workers is considered to be within the management of the available boundaries of work among the individual workers. It is important for the workers to be accorded respectable contractual terms. This is the call of the many unions influencing the functionalism of the U.S. Federal labor laws. The other aspect is found within the scope of protection (New York University & Marke, 1999). Protection is an essential factor required by every business organization. Therefore, it is a requirement for many unions to test and re-test their strategies and ensure that they guarantee maximum safety to employees. In order to have well-paying protection methods, many unions have tried to work within the parameters of growth and strategy formulation as established by the Federal labor laws in place (Twomey, 2009).
Roles and responsibilities of key participants in a right-to-work state when compared to a non-right-to-work state
In the U.S., a worker can choose to be a member of a workers' union or chose not to be. Such a decision is protected by the law and nobody can be forced into a union without their consent. Under such circumstances, an individual under the right-to-work state escapes the duties of making payments and contributions to a union. The key participants in every state with and without the rights to work have emerged as strong components of market performers. As indicated in the U.S. Federal labor laws, several responsibilities have…