In 1894, American workers staged our first labor strike in Pullman, Illinois. Before it was over, more than 150,000 people were involved and federal troops would kill several protesters by indiscriminately shooting into crowds. Labor organizers say that throughout their history companies have used force or replacement workers to punish strikers and end strikes. They claim company managers sometimes harass, intimidate and fire workers who attempt to organize co-workers or encourage strikes. In an attempt to settle labor disputes as amiably as possible, most collective bargaining agreements now contain a mediation and/or arbitration clause. These â€œalternative dispute resolutionâ€ processes bypass the legal system. The mediation process typically involves a third-party moderator who helps parties negotiate a settlement amongst themselves. Binding arbitration uses a third-party referee, agreed upon by both employer and employees, to decide the final resolution of a dispute. Arbitration avoids worker strikes and allows neutral third-parties to decide a dispute without litigation. However, arbitration is not used to resolve disputes when a new union is being certified â€“a procedure that is often lengthy and contentious. Unions have proposed using arbitration to help allay this difficult process. Employers disagree saying, unions will not have any incentive to make reasonable contract demands since the further apart they are from employers, the more likely an arbitrator will be called in to settle the dispute. Employers are concerned that once an arbitrator is brought in to settle an impasse regarding an initial labor contract, companies will no longer be able to negotiate or implement their own terms.
H.R.169 – Labor Relations First Contract Negotiations Act of 2013
I oppose reforming current labor dispute policy and wish to defeat H.R.169
I support amending the National Labor Relations Act to require mediation and, if necessary, binding arbitration of initial contract negotiation disputes, and wish to pass H.R.169