English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

The right of self-organization granted employees by section 71 of the National Labor Relations Act2 includes a right to engage in workplace union solicitation. This activity may be limited only by the employer's managerial needs.' Indeed, employees' solicitation right is considered so essential to self-organization that they may not waive it in a collective bargaining agreement. Yet the Supreme Court, while recognizing the importance of contact between employees and union organizers for informed exercise of the right of self-organization,5 has long insisted upon separate analyses of solicitation by employee and nonemployee union organizers, and has restricted solicitation by recognizing an employer property right only in the latter context. This Note challenges the rationale underlying the doctrinal distinction between employee and nonemployee solicitation. It argues further that the nonemployee solicitation doctrine fails adequately to value employee job security, by allowing a trivial employer property claim to undermine employees' statutory right to advance their interests through selforganization. In this respect, the nonemployee solicitation doctrine limits the reach of an emerging balance between enhanced employee job security and limited employer property rights reflected in both the administration of the NLRA and the erosion of the doctrine of employment at will.

Property Rights and Job Security: Workplace Solicitation by Nonemployee Union Organizers