eolesen wrote: ↑Tue Aug 30, 2022 12:28 pm
Personally, I think if railroads and airlines were put under Taft Hartley, you might see more serious attention paid to negotiations because the right to strike becomes immediate on contract expiration. None of this nonsense of dragging things out 2 to 5 years.
Mr. Olesen, it is my understanding that railroads and airlines ARE governed by "the trilogy" to the extent that so long as there is no conflict between "trilogy" and Act provisions, the Act will govern.
For example, the Landrum-Griffen, the third "leg" of the Trilogy enacted during the Eisenhower years, provides that a union member may seek legal remedies against a union for "failure to represent". A railroad worker has those rights; I can recall a General Chairman once sharing with me that "5% of my men give me 95% of my headaches". Those are the ones that in an instance where carrier-imposed discipline is fair and proper, will have the Union take the matter up to Board level, lest he seek remedies against his own union!!!
Now there is one area, that now over forty years and one intervening career later, I cannot reconcile. That is where the Act allows "closed/union shops", i.e. you will join the union, yet Taft Hartley, enacted by veto override during the Truman years, prohibits such.
As information, the first leg, the Wagner Act, was enacted during FDR's presidency.
Anyone holding an Agreement position in the railroad or airline industry care to enlighten?