U.S. Labor Union Acts: From Norris-LaGuardia to Landrum-Griffin

Introduction to U.S. Labor Legislation

The rights of American workers and their relationship with labor unions have been built up over a long period of time. For much of that history, the Soviet Union served as the greatest economic and philosophical opponent of the United States, and that rivalry was frequently used to control both labor unions and laborers themselves.

The Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932

The first major law to be passed in this area was the Norris-LaGuardia Act of 1932. Without getting into technical details, the law gave workers the right to join a labor union while employed by banning what are known as yellow-dog contracts. It also gave labor unions the right to organize among workers and stopped courts from issuing injunctions during labor disputes with management. (Norris-LaGuardia Act)

A yellow-dog contract is an agreement between an employer and an employee in which the employee promises not to join a labor union during the course of employment, as a condition of being hired. While the Norris-LaGuardia Act made such contracts illegal at the federal level, a number of U.S. states still have right-to-work laws that restrict the formation of unions. These laws do not technically violate the Norris-LaGuardia Act, yet they still effectively permit the spirit of yellow-dog arrangements to persist in practice. (Yellow-dog contract)

This situation makes clear that the government can choose to support either side — labor or management — depending on the circumstances, and that such choices are often driven by financial influence. Industrial management generally has far greater resources to contribute to political campaigns and other political purposes, which tends to give employers an advantage in shaping legislation. The question of why workers should be stopped from organizing through contractual clauses remains a genuine concern for workers' rights, even if right-to-work laws also recognize an individual worker's right not to join a union if they choose.

The Wagner Act of 1935 and the NLRB

The National Labor Relations Act — commonly known as the Wagner Act of 1935 — represents a stronger measure than its predecessor, in part because it includes built-in enforcement mechanisms. Congress created this act to secure workers' rights to unionize, and enforcement was placed in the hands of the newly established National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB conducts secret-ballot elections within organizations to determine whether employees wish to be represented by a union. It also investigates allegations of unfair labor practices by either employers or unions. The act guarantees non-supervisory employees the right to organize, to choose their own representatives, and to bargain collectively with their employer. Workers may also choose not to exercise any or all of these rights. (The NLRB: The Wagner Act of 1935)

The act applies to workers in most industries, but it does not cover workers in airlines, railroads, agriculture, or government. Over the years, the courts have developed the applicable legal standards from the original text of the act. The Wagner Act made it illegal for both employers and labor unions to interfere with workers' rights, and the NLRB was established specifically to conduct hearings in cases involving unfair labor practices. As an independent body, the NLRB oversees the law, investigates complaints, holds hearings, determines the composition of individual employee bargaining units, and verifies union certifications. (The NLRB: The Wagner Act of 1935)

The Wagner Act is also connected to the Norris-LaGuardia Act in that it reinforces the prohibition on discriminatory practices against union members. This has been reflected in cases where employers have refused to hire someone because of union membership, or have declined to rehire seasonal workers who joined a union. There have also been cases in which employees were laid off, demoted, or transferred to less desirable positions or locations specifically because of union membership. The act gives employees the right to form unions and permits both strikes and picketing under certain conditions. Similarly, under certain conditions, employers are also permitted to declare lockouts.

All steps taken by either employers or employees are ultimately aimed at getting their respective demands met. There are many federal and state laws governing these relationships, as well as regulations and prior decisions from administrative agencies. Among all of them, the Wagner Act stands as probably the first labor statute to provide genuine administrative support for labor, unionization, and collective bargaining. The National Labor Relations Board, created by this act, consists of five members appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, each serving a five-year term. The board operates through thirty regional offices across the country, all of which report to the head office in Washington. (The NLRB: The Wagner Act of 1935)

Conclusion

The concept of labor has changed over the years, and this has also changed the role of labor in the production of goods and services. Today everything is so highly mechanized that labor has only a small role to play. That has probably been the reason for its declining importance in society.

The overall trajectory of U.S. labor legislation shows clearly that new laws kept appearing as technology evolved and the nature of work changed. What was true of labor in the 1920s is not true today, and the law has had to adapt accordingly. Yet alongside those changes in law, the emphasis on labor and its problems has shifted away from the center of public policy. Matters once handled directly by the Secretary of Labor have been delegated further down the administrative chain, a sign that labor issues have become a lower priority. This shift is also visible in broader patterns of American business and industry, where many production operations have been moved out of the United States altogether, effectively exporting labor problems rather than solving them. The government has also consistently exempted itself from labor law, as no such laws apply to government employees. It is therefore fair to conclude that the problem of labor, its unions, and the need to manage the relationship between workers and employers has long been treated as a necessary evil — with laws designed more to control labor than to recognize workers as equal contributors to the development of society.