SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Bosses do not need consent for temps to unionize in mixed bargaining units
Working In These Times reports
[In a 3-1 decision,] the National Labor Relations Board on [June 11] overturned a Bush-era standard that said a union could only organize a bargaining unit of jointly employed and regular employees if both employers consented--even if those employees worked together closely. "Jointly employed" includes temps who are hired through staffing agencies.
The new decision allows jointly employed temps to bargain collectively in the same unit with the solely employed workers they work alongside, ruling that bosses need not consent so long as workers share a "community of interest".
[...] In this new ruling from Miller & Anderson, Inc., the Board returns to a standard set in 2000, during the Clinton administration, in a case called M.B. Sturgis, Inc., which was overruled in Oakwood [Care Center].
[...] In a statement announcing the ruling, the NLRB said, "requiring employer consent to an otherwise appropriate bargaining unit desired by employees, Oakwood has ... allowed employers to shape their ideal bargaining unit, which is precisely the opposite of what Congress intended".
The ruling represents a blow to corporations that have moved forcefully, sometimes overwhelmingly, toward using temporary workers in an effort to block worker benefits and collective bargaining.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by MichaelDavidCrawford on Friday July 22 2016, @11:48PM
Just laying them off after eighteen months doesn't make them consultants.
The problem is that there would have to be a second lawsuit. Someone with standing would have to complain.
Yes I Have No Bananas. [gofundme.com]
(Score: 3, Interesting) by migz on Saturday July 23 2016, @08:11AM
I don't know why people think there is a thing a job security. If you are perm you get paid less, more compulsory salary deductions, can't claim many expenses in exchange for very little more security, and dibs if there are cuts. If you are temp, you get paid more, fewer compulsory deductions, get to claim more expenses, and have to file extra tax documents, but can "moonlight", but have a slightly weaker security.
If the paper says perm or contractor you are a dick for going back afterwards and insisting on something you did not agree to being enforced. The law may be on your side, but you are morally and ethically a liar.
We need to be more aggressive about employment contracts, I've walked away from very good job offers (signed by the company), because I did not agree to some terms, and their attitude was "everybody signs the same contract, it's a legal requirement". If more people did, companies might reconsider these one-sided contracts.
The system is broken when I have about 2 years of undergrad Law, one of them specializing in HR, and still find reading employment contracts a nightmare.