英国law作业代写 代理费

2020-03-30 02:59

由于认为代理店协议以及非工会成员所需的代理费是符合宪法的,因此该案件导致了一些变化,允许雇员不支付工会的任何非必要费用(Abood诉Board el。等,1977年)。虽然这一案件的审理可能是合乎逻辑的,但很难达成一致意见。要求所有员工支付费用,以支付他们因行动而获得的福利,这是解决一个过于复杂问题的简单办法。在美国这样的资本主义国家,维护公民的选择自由,特别是在金融决策方面,是最重要的概念之一,自美国建国以来,这一直是一个普遍的行动理由。对本案的审理似乎无视这种自由,而倾向于只允许特定群体谈判的方法。集体谈判应该是一种选择,而不是立法支持的谈判方法,工会收取代理费的做法在1985年作为代理费合法性的另一个问题再次受到质疑。第二个最高法院的案件再次提出了代理费的问题。在芝加哥教师工会诉哈德逊案中。本案的原告是非工会会员,他们对所要求的代理费提出异议。本案的被告是芝加哥教师联合会。本案的问题是,非工会雇员有一种反对代理费的方法;但是,这些费用是在反对程序之前取出来的,对收费的计算方法没有明确的理解方法,反对方法由工会自己管理。
英国law作业代写 代理费
With the holding that agency shop agreements, as well as required agency fees for non-union members, are constitutional, the case resulted in changes that would allow employees to withhold from contributing to any nonessential costs of a union yet not all (Abood v. Board el. Et., 1977). Though the holding of this case may be logical, it is difficult to agree with. Requiring a fee from all employees to pay for the benefits they gain as a result of the actions is a simple solution to a far too complex problem. In a capitalist country such as the United States, upholding a citizen’s freedom of choice, especially in regards to financial decisions, is one of the most vital concepts that has been a prevalent cause for action since the creation of this nation. The holding of this case seems to disregard such freedoms in favor of a method that allows only for negotiation by a specified group. Collective bargaining should be made an option, not a legislatively supported method of negotiation.The practice of agency fees by unions was again brought into question in 1985 as another issue of the legality for agency fees. A second supreme court case brought forth the issue of agency fees again. In the case of Chicago Teachers Union v. Hudson. The plaintiff of the case were non-union members that had objected against the agency fees requested of them. The defendant in the case was the Chicago Teachers Union.  The issue in the case was that non-union employees had a method of objecting agency fees; however, the fees were taken out prior to the objection process, there was not a clear method of understanding the the method of calculation for the fees charged, and the method of objection was managed by the union themselves .
本段内容来自网络 并不是我们的写手作品 请勿直接剽窃,查重100%,造成后果与本站无关。如需定制论文请记得联系我们。