9A Agreement

08 Sep 2021

30

9A Agreement

The court began its opinion by ruling that the NRA was supposed to “allow workers to freely choose their own representatives.” (I have trouble writing it because I lost a case of appeal in the third circle concerning an 8(f) agreement in which I insisted on this point.) The Court held that Section 8(f) does not change this situation simply because it allows the employer to decide whether its employees are unionized or not. Accordingly, the General Court recognised that an agreement under Article 8(f) must be regarded as an agreement under Article 8(f), which may be terminated freely by the employer upon expiry, unless there is irrefutable evidence that the workers have independently chosen to transform it into an agreement under Section 9, point (a). Last week, the DC circuit watered colorado fire, inc. vs. NLRB, the parameters for converting an agreement under Section 8(f) into an agreement under Section 9(a). In this case, the contractor has signed a collective agreement with a local union. The court found that the agreement was a standard agreement with several employers, negotiated between the local association and an association with several employers, the National Fire Sprinkler Association, which the court called a “cookie cutter.” As a result, the employer did not negotiate specific terms and conditions with the union. The agreement contained language that “the company has recognized the exclusive bargaining status of its employees pursuant to Section 9(a) of the National Labor Relations Act” The contractor extended the agreement several times until 2010, when the employer did not renew the agreement.