Collective Bargaining and Civil and Criminal Liability

Answer

Collective Bargaining and Civil and Criminal Liability

Freeman, R. B., & Han, E. (2012). The war against public sector collective bargaining in the US. Journal of Industrial Relations, 54(3), 386-408.

The article is about the effects of the 2008-2009 recession which created major problems in the budgetary process in most states in US. As a result, several laws to the effect were created. According to the author, conservative Republicans had succeeded in several state elections in the year 2010 and introduced laws that were aimed at weakening or eliminating public sector bargaining arguing that it highly contributed to the shortfalls and hindered government reactions and proper responses to the crisis. Most unions and their associates fought such changes in order to preserve unionism and collective bargaining since they viewed it as an issue that was very instrumental to the developments of the states. During the discussions one of the most important laws that govern collective bargaining is the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). According to the article, the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) oversees labor relations in both public and private schools, and are subjected to certain limitations. In that regard, the teachers' union of schools should decide whether or not the NLRA and its regulation apply to its school. State labor acts govern labor relations between public school districts and teachers' unions. The article is very important in understanding the educational laws governing collective bargaining. It has highlighted several clauses of National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and how they can be applied not only in the private schools but also in several institutions where knowledge of collective bargaining is required.

Davis, N. M. (2012). Scope of Collective Bargaining in Public Education: Toward a Comprehensive Balancing Test. Wash. UJ Urb. & Contemp. L., 36, 107.

The rise of teachers' unions and the establishment of public employment acts have granted educators more influential and commanding voice in making decisions that impact their conditions of work. According to the author, 33 states have approved the public employment relations acts (PERAs) which give educators and other public workers the privilege to negotiate with their managers. The choice sections of such laws show which areas are negotiable and characteristically command negotiating as to "wages, hours, and other terms and conditions of employment." The scope-of-bargaining argument emphasizes on a proper explanation of such statutory provisions. The article has specific educational laws that govern collective bargaining. The legislation that is highlighted by the authors is Public Employment Relations Act. According to the article, this act has enabled legislators to incorporate private cases into particular provision of the law. For example, certain states have included management rights provisions which are exempting certain items or issues from the process of collective bargaining. Another collective bargaining law that has been mentioned by the author is Judicial Interpretation of Collective Bargaining Statutes. The article has given a comprehensive knowledge of several laws that govern collective bargaining and is significant in this particular study. Other than just mentioning such laws, the authors have detailed information about them and how they are applied not only in everyday activities but also in schools.

Hasnas, J. (2009). The centenary of a mistake: One hundred years of corporate criminal liability.

The article contends that no justification should be there for any commercial criminal liability. Firstly, corporations do not have ethical agents which are in a position of morally blameworthy or praise action; therefore, not appropriately subject to punishment. Additionally, criminal chastisement for corporations is only inappropriate since 1) it progresses no genuine aims of punishment, 2) it generates an intolerable risk of a prosecutorial abuse or error 3) it is unnecessary to discuss or address a civic harm. The purpose achieved by intimidating organizations with criminal punishments is to move the balance within power between the defense and the prosecution in white criminal case fundamentally in courtesy of prosecution. Nonetheless, it is unpredictable with the intrinsic generous prejudice of criminal law which exemplifies a normative valuation that an uncontrolled administration is a superior danger to nationals’ well-being than individual criminals. The article alleges that commercial criminal liability should not be hypothetically justified since it directly violates a theoretical construction of the Anglo-American criminal law. The article is very important in educating people about civil and criminal liability. The authors state that for any criminal liability to be proven on a person, an intention to do a crime exists, such purpose is not obligatory for founding a civil liability.  Creating a civil or criminal liability should not contradict non-establishment or establishment of other liabilities, and the wrong punishment should not effect on restraining the possibility of a civil liability nor approximating the security.