Limited recruitment in the public sector is the latest “closed store”: a relic in the digital age where posts can be published online easily and under fewer conditions. Limited recruitment in the public sector is the last store closed and it is time for it to be moved into the 21st century. This is an unfair labour practice for an employer—… (3) by discrimination with respect to the employment or employment of a job, or by a clause or condition of employment intended to promote or prevent affiliation with a labour organization: provided that nothing in that sub-chapter or in any other U.S. status prevents an employer from entering into an agreement with a labour organization … as a condition of employment affiliation on or after the thirtieth day following the start of this activity or the entry into force of such an agreement … if such a work organization is the staff representative…. In addition, provided that no employer justifies discrimination against a worker for non-affiliation with a labour organization (A) if he has legitimate reason to believe that such affiliation was not available to the worker under the same conditions as those generally applied to other members, or (B) if there are legitimate reasons to believe that the affiliation is based on grounds other than the worker`s omission, periodic levies and opening taxes have been is the subject of a uniform tender, refused or terminated. Conditions for acquiring or maintaining membership.
In response to these criticisms, Congress amended the NLRA in 1947 by adopting the LABOR-MANAGEMENT-RELATIONS ACT (29 U.S.C.A. No. 151 and beyond). This law, known as the TAFT-HARTLEY ACT, limited union activities to many limits. It has limited rights to strike rights, prohibited supervisors from participating in unions, and restricted the right to strike in situations where the President of the United States and Congress have found that a strike would endanger national health and safety. The Taft-Hartley Act prohibits secondary boycotts and a union strikes employees of a neutral or “secondary” party, such as the . B of a retailer, to force the secondary party to cease business with the party with which the union has its main dispute, such as a manufacturer.B. The Taft-Hartley Act also allowed some states to ban union shopping by adopting LOIS-TO-WORK LAWS, which prohibit workers from joining a union as a precondition for maintaining or maintaining employment.
At the other end of the workforce is the “open store,” which does not require its workers to join a union as a condition of hiring or maintaining employment or to support it financially. Dunn and Gennard found 111 British redundancies when a closed store was introduced, 325 people were involved,:125, and they stated: “While supporters of the closed store can argue that it is estimated that at least 325 layoffs are a relatively small number of closed shops compared to the total population, critics would consider this figure to be substantial, arguing that dismissal is too much.” :126 With regard to the store closed before entry, they stated: “Its raison d`être is to exclude people from jobs by denying them union membership.” 132 The Taft-Hartley Act also prohibits unions from imposing excessively high initiation fees as a condition of membership, in order to prevent unions from using introductory fees as a means of removing non-unionized workers from a particular sector.