Law

Introduction

Current investigations show that the United States is one of the countries that are ready to spend much money on health care in comparison to other countries in the whole world (Hammaker, 2011). However, the intentions of the government to improve the conditions of health care cannot be defined as successful because there are still a number of problems, challenges, and mistakes that put human lives under threat.

Hammaker (2011) admits that the development and improvement of the US health care system are possible in case the rethinking of old and present ideas occurs because many Americans cannot understand what they actually see and what they can use in terms of health care. Collective thinking and the interpretation of information should be taken into consideration when the analysis of legal health care should be developed.

Understanding of health law includes the necessity to learn the basics of the US Constitution and even the Declaration of Independence. Besides, there are several types of laws like statutory, common, or administrative laws that help to realize the rights and needs of patients and other stakeholders of the health care industry. Finally, the evaluation of legal health care should be based on the analysis of court decisions and their impact on people. A number of cases are based on the discussion of abortion, end of life, genetics, and some administrative issues.

Legal aspects of the US healthcare vary considerably and help to realize that the country continues taking steps and improving the conditions under which health care is offered to people; however, the current concern and problems cannot be neglected because the US healthcare system is not perfect, and the provision of laws, criminal penalties, and legal standards is the decision that the country could make in order to change the situation and help people enjoy health care and avoid medical and administrative malpractice.

Historical Background of Health Care and Law in the United States

Legal aspects of healthcare cannot be understood without the investigation of the historical backgrounds of health care. First hospitals appeared under the rules of two civilizations, the Hindu and the Egyptians (Pozgar & Santucci, 2016). The development of Greek and Roman hospitals was observed between the 5^th century and the 15^th century AD.

Religion, politics, and military relations influenced the appearance of hospitals around the whole world. Still, only the years at the beginning of the 18^th century were defined as the period when appropriate hospitals and healthcare services revived (Pozgar & Santucci, 2016). Manhattan Island, Philadelphia, and New York City were the first allocations of hospitals where the citizens of America could ask for healthcare services.

Though the services were offered to soldiers only at the beginning, the reasons to ask for treatment were identified and improved so that a number of citizens could go to a hospital and request for help. For a long period of time, people considered hospitals as the places where their diseases could be diagnosed and treated. Health care was based on the provision of available services and improvements in the quality of life.

Nowadays, the development of health care promotes a number of changes. It is not enough to believe that a hospital is a place where medical services could be offered. Hospitals are the places where new medicine and treatments are offered as well as many legal, financial, and human resource issues have to be taken into consideration (Pozgar & Santucci, 2016).

It is not always possible for people to get medical help in case they are not aware of certain legal issues. Therefore, some researchers admit that law and medicine are the fields that have a number of similarities because both are “practiced” and defined as inexact sciences where interpretations and changes occur and questions are never precisely addressed (Steiner, 2013). The first cases of health care law were observed during the colonial period when English law was applied in the majority of colonies in regard to the needs of new land.

However, with time, the situation was changed. The results of the American Revolution proved that people could improve existing laws and consider their own needs and expectations. For example, in 1829, the decision of the US Supreme Court included the possibility to consider the common law of England not an obligation for the Americans but the basis the parts of which could be “applicable to their situations” (Pozgar & Santucci, 2016, p. 18). As a result of such court decisions, different states of America got the right to adopt the laws on their own and consider some aspects of the existing English, Spanish, and French laws.

As soon as laws and standards were identified, people got a chance to solve their ethical dilemmas, concerns, and misunderstandings with the help of constitutions, statutes, regulations, and case laws. To succeed in using laws in healthcare management, people have to realize that “laws are the very bulwarks of liberty; they define every man’s rights, and defend the individual liberties of all men” (Pozgar & Santucci, 2016, p. 16).

Importance of Legal Principles in Health Care

A number of legal and ethical issues are usually discussed in terms of health care. On the one hand, a law is a possibility to establish social rules and standards the violation of which could impose the creation of some kind of criminal liability and civil responsibility. On the other hand, a law has to be properly managed to understand and avoid risks and consider the needs and expectations of citizens. In other words, some new challenges and liabilities could appear during the period when it is necessary to create the solutions to the already existing challenges and concerns.

In the United States, there are two forms in which law could be created. There are federal and state laws. People could use the norms of the administrative system, the civil system, and the criminal system. For example, the criminal justice system is defined as an opportunity to decrease the existing health disparities and provide all people with a chance to ask for health care and get the required portion of treatment (Binswanger, Redmond, Steiner, & Hicks, 2011). Ordinary people are under a threat of facing medical maltreatment and the inabilities to protect their rights and prove the mistakes. Therefore, they have to rely on a list of legal and ethical principles according to which healthcare workers cannot avoid their responsibilities and responses.

At the same time, employees have to be protected by the rules and obligations imposed by their companies. It could happen that the leaders of companies reject the provision of healthcare services or insurance due to some personal beliefs and ideals. The example is the case Gilardi v. US Department of Health and Human Services in 2013.

The essence of that case was the impossibility to combine the religious preferences of the company’s leaders with the human rights. The Gilardi brothers, as the adherents of the Catholic Church, did neither believe in nor support the ideas of contraception, sterilization, and abortion. Therefore, they did not agree to provide their employees with health insurance that could cover such issues (Gilardi v. United States department of health and human services, 2013). In result, the government did not have compelling interests with the help of which the plaintiff’s position could be supported so that the imposition on the Gilardis was justified (Wheaton, 2013).

The chosen court decision and the presence of similar cases prove that people cannot find the required balance between healthcare and legal aspects. It is necessary to analyze each situation separately and clarify if there are enough reasons to support or reject the idea. Healthcare is the field where mistakes and misunderstandings occur very often, and people are in need of some clarifications and support.

The development of legal principles, law, and regulations is the chance to provide people with hope and clarity that their health and treatment are safe and directed to improve the quality of a human life. Justice in health care could be achieved in case the government starts paying its attention to the improvement of the legal system of the country.

Basic Law Concepts in the US Health Care

Laws in health care have been developed during the last several centuries. The result of such development is the creation of a strong health care system with different types of laws and impacts on citizens. The aim of laws is to govern the relations between various private individuals, public organizations, and the government.

Taking into consideration the nature of the relations between people, the law could be divided into public law (the cases that discuss the relations between people and the government) and private law (the cases that discuss the relationships between individuals) (Pozgar & Santucci, 2016). Public law helps to clarify the conditions when the steps taken by individuals or organizations do harm to patients or lead to injuries. Private law is a kind of opposition to public law because it includes the cases when human rights are discussed.

Americans underline that their healthcare system is far from being perfect. In addition to the fact that not all people could allow themselves getting appropriate, timely treatment, people cannot be confident in the quality of the offered services. The investigations developed by British researchers prove the disadvantages of the system and explain that a number of British people, who have to work in the United States, agree to pay for their flights and return home in order to get the required portion of medical help. British people admit that it remains to be cheaper to go home and get treatment in comparison to the prices established by the American government (McSherry, 2015).

There are no laws or regulations that could protect people against spending their money. If British people, who live in the United States for some reason, have a chance to go home and be treated, the Americans are at a loss because there are no legal and appropriate ways to take care of their health and use the free help of medical experts in time. The case Whole Woman’s Health v. Cole is the example of how people have to deal with the questions of poverty when the necessity to solve health issues arises. The decision of the court proved that Texas women had a constitutional right to safe and legal abortion care regardless their economic and social positions (Whole woman’s health v. Cole, 2013).

Regarding the possibilities of the law to stabilize human lives and provide the answers and explanations, it is wrong to avoid its effects. Human behavior is guided by law in medicine as well as in other daily life activities. Though a number of cases and situation are discussed and resolved without the help of lawyers and courts, the existence of the legal system is the stimulus for people to solve their questions in a short period of time and to avoid misunderstandings that have to be solved on public (Steiner, 2013). Legal principles help to reinforce the already developed settlements and statements and create the advantages for people, who want to address the legal system of the country.

Legislation in Health Care

Today, in the United States, there are several important acts, codes, rules, and regulations that define the possibilities of Americans and protect the rights of people. The most important laws and acts appeared in the middle of the 1990s century. Though the Equal Pay Act of 1963 had nothing in common with health care and medical services, it promoted the creation of equal working conditions for men and women and promoted the development of equality among employees (Steiner, 2013).

Such act helped to create a basis for people to rely on while developing other aspects of human services and care. In one year, the Civil Rights Act was introduced in order to prohibit the cases of discrimination of Americans in regards to their gender, race, color, origins, etc. People got a chance for equal services and opportunities and used their chances to ask for help and care.

1970 was the year when the Occupational Safety and Health Act was developed (Steiner, 2013). According to the act, all states had to consider legislation with the help of which the implementation of standards for various industries could identify safety norms. It was one of the first legislations where people understand the worth of their health and safety even if they have to work and take responsibilities.

In other words, employers had to take care of their worker and create the conditions under which no harm to health could be observed. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 played an important role in the health care of the United States because it identified the conditions under which people with disabilities would have job opportunities and benefits to such organizations as mental health centers or nursing homes.

With time, the development of regulations and laws became a significant point for consideration because the government tried to create the conditions that made people (employers) responsible for and aware of the needs of other people (employees). There is the Pregnancy Discrimination Act (1978) under which all pregnant women with appropriate medical conditions could ask for medical care and support of their employers.

In other words, a pregnant woman has a right to a sick leave without being fired. Unfortunately, a number of women tried to use this act as the excuses for their mistakes in the workplace or the inabilities to complete some portion of work. For example, the court decisions of the cases Harris v. City of Santa Monica or Hamilton v. Southland Christian School showed that pregnancy should not be used as the main excuse and defined as the main reasons for the firing. Companies could have other complaints and explanations for such decisions. The Supreme Court supported defendants. The case of Hitchcock v. Angel Corps, where the decision was made in favor of the plaintiff, proved that some companies continued firing women because of their specific conditions.

One of the latest and most remarkable legal achievements in the United States was the introduction of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act in March 2010. Also known as Obamacare, the ACA aims at protecting patients’ rights and providing affordable health insurance for all Americans regardless their incomes, age, gender, color, etc.

Though a number of people admired the possibilities to get health insurance with no time limitations and low drug costs, there are a number of disadvantages that frustrate people. For example, a number of people still have to pay some kind of premiums in order to increase their chance to get insurance in a short period of time. Besides, there are certain penalties for people who do not have insurance. Finally, new taxes occur in order to create the conditions for the ACA. People stay confused with the conditions under which they could actually get their health care, treatment, and required medical help.

Protection of Patients’ and Employees’ Rights in the Healthcare Sphere

Taking into consideration the regulations and act the Americans have to rely on when they ask for medical help, it is hard to guess if the legal system improves or destroys the healthcare system of the United States. On the one hand, the ACA helps to establish the main legal protections for people and create the conditions that have been absent for a long period of time (Rosenbaum, 2011). People got a guarantee for affordable health care insurance coverage and the possibility to ask for medical services from birth to retirement. People could stop bothering of their insurances with the help of such act. The number of uninsured people could be reduced considerably. Finally, Medicaid enrollment could be increased by 15 million beneficiaries (Rosenbaum, 2011).

In addition to the possibility to protect people’s rights to health insurance, the ACA proves the importance of such issues as fairness and quality among the Americans. There are no other ways to explain that all people, who are defined as legal American citizens, should have the same opportunities and use the same health insurance coverage.

At the same time, this act helps to increase the quality and values in the healthcare system. Medical workers have to deal with a diverse patient population (Rosenbaum, 2011). Therefore, the healthcare system has to be constantly improved and developed. Finally, the ACA underlines the importance of investments and involvement of a number of people in the discussions of the questions of the public health. However, it is hard for people to understand a true nature of such investments so that they are confused because of the importance of new taxes and penalties.

The rights of employees are not clearly defined in the ACA. Still, medical workers could understand their responsibilities and obligations in regards to the expectations of the government and patients. Some medical workers believe that the idea of strikes as the possibility to solve their problems, increase salaries, or improve working conditions is the only decision they could make.

However, it is necessary to underline that the US federal law prohibits the idea of striking among the employees in the spheres of the government, railroad, airline, firefighting, and even police. Health care is one of few spheres where strikes and picketing are allowed in all states (Pozgar & Santucci, 2016). In health sphere, employees could use any possible means to protect their rights and underline the cases of injustice if any.

Importance of Court Decisions in Health Care

For a long period of time, many people believed that the decisions made by politicians and their own independent decisions could impact their lives. At the same time, they want to believe that there are a number of groups of people whose roles and suggestions remain to be crucial because of different reasons. Still, not much attention has been paid to the impact of court decisions made in the health care. One of the significant differences in the United States is the possibility of its people to challenge any kind of law in court. Therefore, the decisions made in courts may have a considerable impact on the constitutional concepts, personal attitudes to health care and the legal system of the country.

At the same time, court decisions become the examples for ordinary people and the explanations of why some steps should be prevented, and some steps have to be taken in the shortest possible period of time. The examples of court decisions introduced in this project help to realize that courts do not try to support one group of people and convict another group of people. The main task of courts is to clarify all conditions under which a concern occurs and offer the most appropriate solution regarding the existing laws, acts, and regulations.

Conclusion

In general, the connection between the health care and the legal system of the United States cannot be neglected. People want to believe that they could demand medical services, support, and treatment and rely on the law and acts developed by their country. The health care of the United States is one of the most impressive in the whole world. At the same time, a number of challenges and concern occur when people start using the law to protect and explain their healthcare needs. Courts decisions vary considerably, and people cannot predict the outcomes of their complaints. Each state has its rules and regulations. However, regarding the differences between states and various attitudes to health care, a law remains to be the general rule of human behavior that is enforced by the government.

There are public laws and private laws, administrative, statutory, and common laws, etc. Each law is the possibility to create a standard that meets the requirements of patients, medical employees, and employers. The health care system should not include the questions of appropriate treatment only. The analysis of legal aspects of healthcare management shows that people could address the courts to solve their personal problems that are connected with health and professional issues that have a connection to health problems. Though the health care of the United States is not perfect, numerous attempts and improvements have been already observed, and the decreased number of cases in 2016 is the best evidence to offer.

References

Binswanger, I.A., Redmond, N., Steiner, J.F., & Hicks, L.S. (2011). Health disparities and the criminal justice system: An agenda for further research and action. Journal of Urban Health: Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 89(1), 98-107.

Gilardi v. United States department of health and human services, No. 13-5069. (2013).

Hammaker, D.K. (2011). Health care management and the law: Principles and applications. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar.

McSherry, M. (2015, January 12). Too many choices, high costs and bureaucracy: British expats grade American healthcare system’a pain in the arse’. The Guardian. 

Pozgar, G.D., & Santucci, N. (2016). Legal aspects of health care administration. Burlington, MA: Hones & Bartlett Learning.

Rosenbaum, S. (2011). The patient protection and affordable care act: Implications for public health policy and practice. Public Health Reports, 126(1), 130-135.

Steiner, J.E. (2013). Problems in health care law. Burlington, MA: Hones & Bartlett Learning.

Wheaton, S. (2013, November 1). Court rules contraception mandate infringes on religious freedom. The New York Times.

Whole woman’s health v. Cole, No. 15-274. (2013).

Property ownership at law and in equity

Section 34(6) of the Law of Property Act 1925 treats co-owners as one legal entity: they are joint tenants in law (McKenzie & Phillips, 2012: 282). The Trustee Act 1925 limits the number of joint tenants of a legal estate to four persons. In this case, the first four owners that are: Satish, Bill, John, Richard are regarded as joint tenants under the statutory law: they are one legal entity and have a legal right and responsibility as a single entity.

The fact that there are five owners of the property means that the first four games in the register hold the property for themselves, and are the legal co-owners in trust. Therefore, Mike is not a legal co-owner. However, since under the equitable law there is no limit to tenancy, Satish, Bill, John, Richard and Mike have equitable rights and responsibilities. Equity categorizes co-ownership in terms of unities of interest (Bray, 2010: 289).

They hold the estate equitably as tenants in common based on the existing presumption in favour of a tenancy common in equity. The presumption here is that there is no proof of agreement among the Satish, Bill, John, Richard and Mike that they will have joint tenancy (Megarry, Wade & Harpum, 2012: 511).

Though the Law of Property Act 1925 and the Trust of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996 do not cover the resulting trust, the case of Bull v. Bull [1955] provided for it. The decision in the case of Stack v Dowden [2007] applies to all the cases of equitable and legal co-ownership. If the estate is a joint tenancy in accordance with the Law of Property Act 1925, the estate will also be a joint tenancy in equity (Bray, 2010: 289).

A joint tenancy satisfies the unities of time, possession, interest, and title. According to the tenancy of Satish, Bill, John and Richard, the parties share unity in interests: they decide to purchase lanes for use as their local office. Moreover, there is the unity of title because their concern in the land is underneath a similar document. They share a unity of time since all want to convey the tenancy at the same particular time. The co-owners are entitled to posses the whole land legally under the unity of possession. However, to completely count as joint tenants, there should be no presumption in favour of a tenancy in common. There is a presumption that there is no proof of a written agreement to own the land jointly; therefore, disqualifying this as a joint tenancy.

According to the manner in which the property is owned, the rights of survivorship are also determined. Legally, Satish, Bill, John, Richard have a joint tenancy. This means they have a will dictating the successors in case of death is null. When one dies, the rest automatically assume full responsibility and ownership of his or her share. Therefore, any successors in such a situation become rebutted. While in terms of tenancy of commons, in case of death, the share goes to the person who is indicated in the will like the next of kin.

Effect of John’s death on the ownership

Section 36(2) of the Law of Property Act (as amended by the Trust of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996) provides that a person serving the joint tenancy can give notice in writing or do some other thing or things that have the potential of effectively severing the tenancy in equity. This means that if John had died under a joint tenancy, legally, the son would not be able to inherit his share since the rest of the joint members automatically assume ownership of his share.

Under co-tenancy in equity, each tenant holds an undivided percentage of interest in the property. When a co-owner passes on, it means his/her interest form the property should be under the next of kin according to his/her will. Thus, since the partners equitably co-own the property as tenants in common, it means that the successor takes up his share. In such a case, the son is able to inherit whatever his father leaves behind.

Richard’s rights and obligations

Where two or more people have a unity of possession in the property, they assume equitable rights and legal responsibilities. With regard to co-ownership, the law imposes a trust (McKenzie & Phillips, 2012: 287). This means that in the case that Satish, Bill, John, and Richard have a joint tenancy, it would be impossible. Where one co-owner wants to sell property against the wishes of the other parties, he/she needs to get a court order under Section 14 of the Trust of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996.

Richard can sell the equitable share and release capital if he can find someone to buy it. However, he cannot sell his legal share because he does not have an identifiable share in the legal estate (Perrins, 2000: 157). He is a joint tenant and cannot act on his own because he is a part of one legal entity with the other tenants. The sale of the title will give vacant possession to the purchaser.

However, under the equitable law, Richard co-owns his piece of property as a tenant in common. Therefore, he has the right to terminate the tenancy by selling his piece and leaving the partnership. On the basis of having no proof of an agreement written down, Richard has the right to sell his share of the property.

References

Bray, J 2010, Unlocking Land Law. 3^rd ed., Routledge, New York.

Bull v. Bull [1955] 1QB 234 CA (Eng).

Law of Property Act 1925, Ch20. London: HMSO.

McKenzie, J. & Phillips, M 2012, Textbook on Land Law, Oxford University, Press Oxford.

Megarry, R, Wade, W, and Harpum, C. (2012). The Law of Real Property. Sweet & Maxwell, London.

Perrins, B. (2000). Understanding Land Law. LEXISNEXIS, San Francisco.

Stack v Dowden [2007] UKHL 17.

Trustee Act 1925 c. 19 (Regnal. 15_and_16_Geo_5), London: HMSO.

Trust of Land and Appointment of Trustees Act 1996, Ch 47, London: HMSO.

Under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the Supreme Court of Canada has made a number of important decisions pertaining to union rights. What impact do these decisions have on management and unions?

Following the decisions made by the Supreme Court of Canada, it is highly likely that both the management and the unions will be affected in one way or another. For instance, the employees will demand an assurance that allows them to engage in various activities within the organization without experiencing any form of interference from the management. Considering the fact that such decisions can also increase the employees’ bargaining power, they should be ready to undergo some challenges. This is because their right to make a collective bargain or engage in an industrial strike is subject to the rules and regulations set by the legislators. Since the Charter on Rights and Freedoms does not accord the employees the right to picket, the management of the organization might limit the level of pickets together with other employee’s activities whereby the employees exercise their rights and freedom.

The decisions made by the Supreme Court of Canada might also force the management and the unions to make changes to retirement procedures. This implies that the management may decide to scrap off the retirement benefits or may increase the number of retirement age so that employees can remain in the organization for a long duration.

Reverse discrimination has, so far, not been a salient issue in Canada, especially since human rights legislation allows employers to use employment equity programs “to correct past wrongs”- that is, hire more protected groups, such as women, members of a visible minority and Aboriginal people, ideally to more accurately reflect the distribution of protected groups in the community in the makeup of the organization’s staff. Despite the legality of employment equity programs, the question has been raised as to whether it is ethical to choose a less qualified candidate over a better qualified one. Shouldn’t the “best” candidate get the job? Please comment.

Reverse Discrimination usually arises when the management of a given organization finds it appropriate to promote or recruit people who come from a disadvantaged group. This means that an employer may opt to recruit a less qualified person to fill a position within an organization. Although there may be highly qualified people available to fill the position, the employer may ignore such qualifications and consequently offer such opportunities to disadvantaged people. Despite the fact that several employment acts insist on equity during the recruiting process, I suppose it is prudent for the management of an organization to put other factors into consideration. Such factors should relate to the goals, targets, and objectives of the organization. It is only by recruiting the most suitable set of employees that an organization can manage to achieve its set goals and objectives. However, the management should be able to maintain the required level of standards when undertaking such processes. This means that management should exercise acts of fairness and eliminate any form of bias during the recruitment process. By doing so, the management finds it easy to address the issue of equality when hiring. It also accelerates the process of achieving the goals and objectives of the organization.

Suppose your employer asks you, the human resource manager, to justify the relatively large recruiting budget that you have been historically assigned what arguments would you provide? What indices or measures will you provide to show that your recruitment is cost-effective?

As the human resource manager of the organization, the relatively large recruiting budget can be justified by the following reasons. To start with, the manager should understand that there is a need to recruit the most competent and able staff. In order to identify the right people to fill vacant positions, the selection process should be carried out in an effective way. This would require the assistance of recruiting experts who are specially trained to undertake the process. A large budget is therefore required to access the experts who will help identify people who have the required knowledge and skills. An inadequate recruiting budget is likely to limit the selection process and consequently, it might lead to the hiring of employees who are not well qualified. Examples of measures or indices that can be used to show the cost-effectiveness of the recruitment process include applicant ratios, cost per hire, cost offers, and hire quality.

Summarize the historical and legal framework which provides the foundations for the American system of labor/management relations

The American labor movement has a long history. The US population has had to unite on several occasions to achieve many gains that the current labor force enjoys across the country. The labor movements that have been witnessed throughout the history of the US have served to determine the current nature of labor relations in the country (Hooley, Jennings & Wolters, 2009). Initially, during the early times of the American republic, the efforts that tradesmen put to bring about better working conditions by declining to work and/or attempting to stop others from working under the same conditions were considered a criminal offense (National Right to Work, n.d).

Most laborers who advocated better terms were put on trial. The trend continued until the dawn of the 1840s when the highest court in Philadelphia rejected the criminal scheme belief that was used to charge persons who were advancing employee interests. This move was a significant change to the legal framework in dealing with workers’ issues.

In the 18^th century, various labor movements pushed for the implementation of different items relating to labor. In the end, such movements had the effect of improving the workplace for millions of the American workforce. For instance, New York Workingmen’s Party that lasted for merely a year pushed for the reduction of daily working hours to about 10 hours. Another group, namely the order of the labor’s knights, worked towards increasing the negotiator powers of workers by enabling them to have a stronger say through the unionization of all workers in the country (National Right to Work, n.d). The group immensely contributed to the 1885 formation of the Alien Contract Labor law that allowed laborers who had a contract to work in the country. Some groups greatly resisted wage cuts, a trend that had caught up towards the end of the 18^th century.

Further strings of legislation that brought about alterations to the law went on to determine the current legal framework in terms of guiding the activities of labor relations in the country. The National Industrial Recovery Act that was passed in 1933 was meant to promote joint negotiations for all mergers, come up with minimum wage standards, institute the highest possible operational time and in some cases prices, and eliminate child labor within the industry. The Wagner ruling that followed later in the mid-1930s replaced the NRA declaration, which was proved undemocratic by the highest judicial chambers.

Analyze the actions of unions and management to determine basic compliance with the major U.S. federal labor laws

In their efforts to establish basic compliance with the major federal labor laws in the US, unions, and management departments have taken a number of measures. One of them is finding out the relevant federal employment laws that specifically apply to their business or fields of employment. Published research shows that they are making good use of the online portal that is provided by the department of labor to determine laws that apply to them and ways in which they can comply (Schaubach, 2014). One is able to differentiate between state and federal laws due to the availability of clear distinctions and elaborations that have been availed to avoid confusion that may lead to non-compliance.

Management and unions are also using the employment guide to determine what constitutes basic compliance with the American Federal labor laws (Schaubach, 2014). The guide that is available at the department of labor offers a description of the main employment laws that influence their operations. The guide has proved useful for individuals who seek information regarding profits, salary, tolerance, security, and wellbeing strategies. Unions tend to explore some of the provisions in the labor laws that can help in protecting their employees during and after strikes to avoid unwarranted discrimination from their employers.

They try to ensure that they conduct all their activities within the requirements that are stipulated by these provisions. This plan helps them and their members to be on the safe side in case the employer goes to the law courts to challenge their actions in relation to certain events. Both unions and management are increasingly opting to hire lawyers on a long-term basis to monitor their activities to ensure that they are all done within the United States’ federal laws. They also offer expert advice on the kind of actions that the firm or union should engage in and/or advice against undertakings that may turn out to be detrimental.

Employers are keen on comprehending the dismissal protections provided for by the federal labor laws. Dismissing employees without observing the procedures in many instances turns out to be costly to the employer. As such, it is paramount for the employer to remain updated at all times on laws that touch the issue of dismissal. Unions are keen on possessing knowledge of the same subject to ensure that their actions are mindful of the effects of their actions on the employees. They tend to ensure that their interests are protected in case of unexpected outcomes (Schaubach, 2014).

Determine the roles and responsibilities of key participants in a right-to-work state when compared to a non-right-to-work state

Twenty-four states enjoy the right-to-work law that protects employees who work in those states. It is not a requirement for them to join a payor any amounts to a union except in some designated cases. Employees in such states can tender their resignation to a union any time without having to worry about any disciplinary action after resigning (Schaubach, 2014). However, in choosing to resign one from a union, participants have a responsibility of giving a notification to such an effect to both the employer and the union in writing that one intends to resign.

They have to revoke his or her authorization for the automatic due check-offs. With the right-to-work law, employers and union representatives are required not to compel their employees to adhere to the requirements of unions if they are not members. They have a duty to act in a way that is not intended to cause unnecessary harm to the employees.

On the other, in non-right-to-work states, it is a requirement for employees to have membership in workers’ unions (Schaubach, 2014). This situation strips them of the freedom to opt in and/or out union membership any time they wish. Union heads have the responsibility of ensuring that all workers have access to the relevant information regarding the union’s activities so that they can understand how membership to such unions can affect them at work. Employers also have a responsibility of providing for an environment that enables workers’ unions to conduct their affairs effectively. The reason why employers need to provide such an environment is to avert any serious actions on the part of employees who may have a negative impact on the workers, employers, and the economy.

Statistical findings indicate that states that have a non-right-to-work policy tend to experience lower growth compared to those that have the right-to-work policy. To ensure that stakeholders who operate in non-right-to-work states are not adversely affected by the activities of workers’ unions, it is paramount for them to take proper steps on their part. They need to put proper measures in place to ensure that such unions remain important to the economy to achieve great economic heights (Schaubach, 2014). With the level of competition that states that have the right-to-work law offer to those that have the non-right-to-work policy, it is important for all necessary measures to be taken to cover up any gaps that result from the difference in policy.

Explain the process for organizing and decertifying unions

Employees seeking representation by unions are best placed when it comes to the institution of mergers. The first step involves a pioneer worker talking to his or her fellow co-workers to find out whether they also share similar or common concerns in relation to the job that they do. They also take note of their employer’s view of the issues of concern to establish whether the employer is willing or unwilling to rectify or discuss the concerns. Where the employer is unwilling to discuss the identified issues, one should gauge the interest of co-workers in the exploration of the organization as a way of addressing the problems.

The second major step in organizing a union is the formation of the internal organizing committee. Membership of this committee should comprise workers who seek union representation. Additionally, workers should be educated on how the organization is done. They need to know what they can expect during a campaign for the union. A unit to do the bargaining is also identified. Workers are then requested to append their signatures to the authorization cards to serve as an indication that they support the formation of the union. These cards are utterly confidential so that the employer does not get to know those who participated in the signing.

If a sizeable majority of the workers sign the authorization cards, the next step is to file a petition with NLRB (National Labor Relations Board) requesting it to carry out a secret ballot election that will establish whether the majority of the employees are in favor of representation by the union while negotiating a contract. An alternative will be the employer’s voluntary recognition of the union. An election petition may then take place followed by bargaining. The internal organizing committee conducts the bargaining function to reach an agreement that is ratified through a secret vote. Following the ratification of the contract, all employees who the agreement covers are offered an opportunity to take up membership in the union to enjoy the rights and responsibilities enjoyed by other members.

On the other hand, decertification involves several steps. Firstly, one needs to establish a proper filing period. Following the expiry of a three-year period, workers can make, if they so wish, a decertification appeal. Secondly, they can then outline the decertification appeal after getting the required number of names from party workers. The NLRB will then carry out an opinion poll where a minimum of thirty percent of workers who form the negotiation body append their names to appeal for a decertification. As a result, employees will have the ability to deal directly with their employer on issues that may be affecting them.

Reference List

Hooley, W., Jennings, K., & Wolters, R. (2009). Labor Relations Process. New York, NY: Cengage Learning.

National Right to Work. (2013). Employees in Right to Work States. Web.

Schaubach, J. (2014). Right to Work Laws: Get the Facts. Web.

The Affordable Care and the Patient Protection Act commonly known as the (PPACA-2010) is a federal statute signed into law in 2010. The design of the statute would be implemented in stages over eight years. The intentions of ACA were in reforming health care systems in United States of America (US). The law deals with laws on health insurance coverage. ACA has a clause that prohibits insurers denying coverage to people with pre-existing conditions. According to the law reviews, ACA will expand Medicaid eligibility while at the same time subsidize insurance premiums for American citizens. To increase on the people accessing insurance at work places, ACA will offer incentives to companies for them to offer health care benefits to their employees (Democrats’ senate gov/reform, 2010).

ACA expects small business or uninsured adults, through health insurance exchanges, created by states and federal government, to buy insurance premiums from a range of private insurances. Although large businesses are not required by law to offer insurance to their employees, they are nevertheless expected to pay penalties for employees who receive subsidized insurance on health.

The PPACA-2010 act requires states to create several agencies to manage implementation of the reforms. These agencies include National Prevention, Public Health and Health Promotion Council, a research institute on Patient Centered Outcomes. The research institute will be funding and conducting research on comparative effectiveness of the reforms. The other agency is the Medicare Independent Payment Advisory Board which will be making recommendations on Medicare spending, in cases where spending increases rapidly (Democrats’ senate gov/reform, 2010).

ACA extends insurance coverage for children up to the age of 26 years, even if they are not living with their parents and prohibits insurances companies from charging deductibles from preventive care. Equally, ACA prohibits insurance companies from dropping clients when they become ill. ACA will slow down the growth of Medicare costs and offer reimbursements to states in order for them to pay for the new expenditures proposed in the law.

The law will offers American a qualified health plan through Health Benefits Exchange. The benefits will include cost sharing and essential services. The law States that, out- of- pocket health benefits requirements should not exceed the health savings account. With the insurance coverage, actuarial values will define how much the insurer will pay and the coverage offered at four different levels: those receiving the Platinum coverage at 90%, Gold cover at 80%, and Silver cover at 70% while Bronze cover at 60% (Democrats’ senate gov/reform, 2010).

Estimates from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) show persons who are not insured in America will drop considerably, by around 32 million people by 2019. This is after implementation of all the provisions of ACA. The number of people who will be left uninsured will be 23 millions on estimate. These are people who will opt out of health policies coverage as well as the illegal immigrants in the country. ACA will offer exemptions to people who will be paying more than 8% of their household incomes for health insurance. ACA expects to raise the rates of Medicare insurance for non-elderly people in America from 83% to 94 %( CBO & JCT’s, 2011).

ACA has strong consumer protections and provides Americans with new health insurance coverage options. It expects the Americans consumers of Medicare insurance to make informed choices. Although signed into law in 2010, many aspects of law have already been implemented, while the provisions of expanding Medicaid and introduction of health exchanges that are affordable launched in 2014.

Some of the disturbing aspects of the American health care systems that led to enactment of the PPACA-2010 are in the cost of health care in America. The cost of health care in America is prohibitive, accounting for more than 17% of the national GDP. Despite this cost or expenditure on health care systems, the health of American is no better than in those countries that spends less. The other issue with the American health care system is that, more people in America do not have health care insurance covers.

The cost and prohibitive nature of health care insurance, combined with the private sector insurance coverage complications, leaves many American uninsured. Thirdly, most people in America would like to make informed decisions about their health and the jobs they are now engaged in. Most Americans work jobs they would rather change simply to keep the insurance covers provided by their employers.

The PPACA-2010 addresses these issues by establishing affordable insurance exchanges expected to take effect in 2014. ACA provides that, where an employer does not offer insurance coverage for his employees, people will buy insurance coverage directly from state or federal managed market place exchanges. Market place exchanges will offer affordable and credible heath benefits plan. ACA however, to increase the number of insured persons, has provisions that limits insurers’ profits and eliminates lifetime and annual limits on insurance coverage.

To address the cost of Medicare in America, the ACA will strengthen Medicare by way of discounting and rebating prescriptions coverage gaps. On the other hand, ACA will expand cost-free preventive services and give oversight on increasing wastage, abuse and fraud in the Medicare system.

One glaring and unintended consequence of ACA is in the need for companies with more than 50 employees to offer health insurance covers to those employees working for 30 or more hours, failure to which, they will be paying heavy penalties. To navigate this provision, a company cuts the number of hours a single employee can work, change the number of shifts and cuts down the workforce. These ultimately will increase the cost of doing business and add up to unemployment in the country.

A review of the paper

A review of the Patient Protection and Affordable ACA paper indicates that ACA is one of the comprehensive health care systems reform in the US. According to ACA, review shows that it is going to transform the market on non-insurance in the country and mandate Americans to take health insurance. ACA will significantly expand the public insurance. ACA proposes various means of raising revenue to support health care services through a number of taxes. ACA will help in reorganizing health care expenditure and cut health care costs through a national health insurance plan.

Some of the key aspects of ACA are rights and protections of health care consumers by way of limiting insurer’s right of cancelling insurance coverage to some group of people. ACA will end the pre-existing conditions element in insurances covers and introduce affordable insurance exchange while expanding Medicaid. ACA will strengthen Medicare through prescription coverage gaps by discounts and rebates. ACA will expand cost-free preventive services and offer tax credits for non-profit, small business and reinsurance options for early retiree.

While establishment of affordable insurance exchanges will erode the employer-provided insurance, the erosion as indicated by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) would be small. Persons covered by health insurance are in companies with more than 50 employees and these types of companies are not necessarily price sensitive when making decision of providing workers with insurance covers. The subsidies provided by ACA are not substantially big enough to offer workers with incentives to look for insurance outside the company plans.

Economically, the ACA provides offsets by the mandates, which will lead most companies in providing insurance to employees. The “free-rider” penalty, which charges companies with more than 50 employees between $2,000-$3000 if employees from these companies seek subsidies on health insurance is another reason companies will offer insurance coverage to their employees.

According to CBO public insurance expansion together with subsidies will cost federal government $940 billion by the end of 2019, covering more than 32 million people. This will have increased the numbers of persons in America receiving health care insurance covers. According to the CBO, there will be an increase in levels of revenues as spending cuts will exceed spending covering health care system. This will cut federal deficit by more than $100 billion in the first ten years. This argument, economically has some flows, although CBO indicates that increases in taxation and speeding cuts are back loaded and not front loaded (CBO &JCT’s ,2011).

The other argument by the paper is on how ACA will cut the cost of health care. According to the CMS, United States spending in health care sector accounts for 17% of the national GDP. CMS contend that, ACA will increase the expenditures. Similarly, Health care systems expenditure in America by 2016 will increase by 2% and 1% in 2019. But these increased expenditures are relatively small compared to the number of people expected covered within the same period (CMS, 2011).

Estimates from the Medicare and Medicaid service centre, shows 34 million more people covered by 2019 against a population of 254 persons insured. On the same line, the Medicare and Medicaid service center indicates that, without ACA reforms, between 2010 and 2019, the cost in the health care system would grow at 6.6% per year. This shows that ACA will increase the number of people insured by 13% at a cost less than national health care expenditure growth (CMS, 2011).

The position taken by the paper clearly indicates that it actually stands the theoretical and economic analysis and stands up to the empirical findings as shown from the reports provided by the CMS and the CBO. As for changes that need made after completion of the course, they would probably be in researching on how the ACA reforms would end up reducing the federal deficit.

References

CBO and JCT’s (2011). Estimates of the Effects of the ACA on the Number of People Obtaining Employment-Based Health Insurance. Web.

CMS (2011). Administrative Simplification Provisions in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010. Web.

Democrats’ senate gov/reform (2010). The patient protection and affordable care Act; detailed summary. Web.

Introduction

The U.S. healthcare industry is highly governed by law. Thus, there are legal principles spelt out in federal and state laws that medical practitioners in the U.S. should observe. When legal issues that pertain to healthcare administration arise, U.S. courts may come in to help with interpretation of the relevant laws. Thus, the Case of Simkins v Moses H.Cone Memorial Hospital (1963) demonstrates the role of the U.S. legal system in administration of healthcare.

At what Level of the Judicial Court System did this Legal Opinion Occur?

The opinion of judge Sobeloff occurred at a U.S. Court of Appeals. Specifically, the U.S. Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit heard the Case of Simkins v Moses H.Cone Memorial Hospital (1963). As demonstrated in the case, “a party dissatisfied with a decision of a lower court”, such as a U.S. District Court, may seek legal redress at a U.S. Court of Appeals (United States Courts, n.d., para. 5).

What was the Opinion of the Lower Court that was Finally Overturned in Simkins?

The opinion of the lower court was that the hospital in question had not been fulfilling a state function (Reynolds, 2004, p. 712). Having found no evidence to the effect that the hospital had used Hill-Burton funds, the lower court ruled in favor of the defendant. Use of Hill-Burton funds would have served as evidence of state action in operations of the hospital. In turn, evidence of state action would have warranted the court’s interpretation of constitutional provisions that applied to the case.

Explain at Least One of the Federal Laws that was Highlighted in Simkins v. Moses H. Cone

The Hospital Survey and Construction Act (1946) came into play in the Simkins v Moses H. Cone hospital case. Commonly referred to as “the Hill-Burton Act”, the federal law was passed to allow the federal government to fund construction of state health facilities and hospitals. In addition, the law provided for the conducting of federal-funded surveys to determine health care needs of specific, hospitals and population groups. However, the Hill-Burton Act contained the “separate but equal clause”, whose constitutionality was later challenged in court (Reynolds, 2004, p. 711).

How did the Federal Law Play a Role in Deciding this Case?

In the case of Simkins v Moses H.Cone Memorial Hospital, the Hill-Burton Act provided a legal basis for invoking the 5^th and 14^th amendments of the U.S. constitution to offer protection against hospital discrimination. For starters, the law allowed the federal government to get involved in operations of private hospitals. Thus, once a hospital participated in a federal program, such as the Hill-Burton, it was bound by law to integrate its services.

In deciding the case, the U.S Court of Appeals established state involvement in the running of Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital. Furthermore, the court considered the fact that the hospital practiced discrimination despite having used federal aid as provided for under the Hill-Burton Act. Thus, the court found use of federal help in a discriminatory manner to have been in contravention of the U.S constitution.

Identify and Discuss the Constitutional Amendments and Issues in the Case

The 5^th and 14^th amendments of the U.S. Constitution were appreciably applied in the case. The amendments prohibited the federal and state governments from discriminating. Various constitutional issues were raised in the case of Simkins v Moses H.Cone Memorial Hospital. For instance, it was critical to determine whether or not the hospital in question had become an instrumentality of the government by permitting federal involvement in its operations (“Constitutional Law,” 1964).

It was also important to determine if the federal government discriminated by funding a medical facility that practiced discrimination. Similarly, was the “separate but equal clause” of the Hill-Burton Act in line with the 5^th and 14^th amendments of the U.S. Constitution? Answers to the issues raised determined whether or not Moses H.Cone Memorial Hospital had violated the law by practicing discrimination.

Explain why the Case had a Limited Reach

The Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital case had a limited reach because the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review it. The case would have produced a far-reaching legal precedent had it gone through the Supreme Court successfully. At the Supreme Court level, it would have been possible for other U.S. Courts of Appeals to refer to the case when deciding on similar disputes. However, the Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital case only reached an appellate court level. Thus, the outcome of the case could not influence judicial decisions that were made outside the jurisdiction of the Fourth Circuit Court (Reynolds, 2004, p.714).

Identify the Federal Official and Agency that Finally Extended the Cases’ Ruling

The U.S. Court of Appeal Fourth Circuit was the federal agency that finally extended the cases’ reach. Although judge Sobeloff was not the court’s chief justice during the case of Cypress v Newport News Hospital Association, he was the federal official who wrote the legal opinion that outlawed all forms of hospital discrimination. Thus, judge Sobeloff was instrumental in the expansion of the Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital case’s reach.

Identify how the Cases’ Outcome Spread Across the Nation

The U.S Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit gave the Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital case an expanded reach by referring to it in nearly every hospital racial discrimination case it handled for 20 years that followed (Reynolds, 2004, p.718). Furthermore, the case was instrumental in design of Hill-Burton regulations that reinforced nationwide hospital integration. Equally important, the case formed a solid background for passage of the Civil Rights Act (1964), which outlawed major forms of discrimination on a national scale (Reynolds, 2004, p.718).

Discuss why you the Think the Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital Case Makes or Fails to Make a Big Difference Today

The Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital case did bring about a significant drop in hospital discrimination over time. The case helped lay a solid groundwork for implementation of the Hill-Burton program. Thus, it is accurate to state that the success of federal programs such as Medicare in modern hospitals traces its roots to the Simkins v. Moses H. Cone Memorial Hospital case. A case in point is the Medicare prescription drug law seeks to control a wide array of practices by pharmaceutical companies to safeguard patients’ interests (Stiller & Weinstock, 2006, p.8).

However, the U.S. healthcare system has not achieved the level of equity envisioned by law. Many poor Americans lack access to good healthcare as a result of poor design of the entire healthcare system. Today, many hospitals grapple with significant shortfalls of primary healthcare specialists such as nurses (Bowman, 2013, para. 11).

As such, while the healthcare law significantly safeguards practitioners’ and patients’ rights, significant proportions of the U.S. population cannot access optimal health care. Today, many patients (including those from minority groups) continue to face challenges such as poor education, limited financial options and ignorance as they pursue effective medication. However, hospital discrimination is no longer a legally sanctioned practice in the entire U.S.

References

Bowman, R.C. (2013). Is the Institute of Medicine Design Waking Up? Web.

Constitutional Law: Discrimination by Private Hospitals Participating in Hill-Burton Program Held to be Violation of Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments. (1964). Duke Law Journal, 1964 (908), 908-914. Web.

Reynolds, P.P. (2004). Professional and Hospital Discrimination and the US Court of Appeals Fourth Circuit 1956-1967. American Journal of Public Health, 94(5), 710-720. Web.

Stiller, J.A., & Weinstock, J.L. (2006). Introduction to Health Law. Web.

Tenant (n.d.). Introduction to the United States Legal System. Web.

United States Courts (n.d.). Comparing State and Federal Courts. Web.

Abstract

Labor unions play a critical role in the US airline industry given that relatively all the workers are either unionized or covered by collective bargaining agreements. The American Airlines Allied Pilots Association (ALPA) has recently rejected a concessionary contract offered by the management. The association rejected a pay rise of up to 13.5 per cent. There has been an insignificant consideration of the America’s economic reality by the ALPA. Previously, the group’s president was forced to resign owing to his quick acceptance of a deal that majority of the union pilots had opposed.

The labor cost of the airlines represents a considerable high wage bill owing to the large workforce. The airline industry offers high wages that attract highly trained staff. This paper is, therefore, researched on the basis of the future position of the ALPA as a union and whether there is any risk in the American airlines owing to the union’s demands. The paper will also delve into the effects of such controversies on the employees and whether there is need to make changes to the labor laws in the United States.

Introduction

The airline workers, compared to other workers in different industries, represent the highest paid unionized workers. Airline workers are able to bargain strongly for the high pays, in addition to the fact that they are favored by the factors of demand and supply. The Labor Management Relations Act was enacted to create an environment that promoted fair labor practices. Later on, the Act was amended to help curb the unequal advantage that unions enjoyed because the Act permitted duties to be levied on unions (DeMaura, 2012).

The airline bargaining power is strong because of strike ultimatums, which can cut down all flight operations. They can also lead to wages being determined on the future economic conditions because of long term contracts. Given the anticipation, the contracts cannot be renegotiated if the aspirations of the economic base are not attained (Chen, Kacperczyk & Ortiz, 2011). The adverse conditions that have recently faced the US airline industry are partly caused by the increasing marketing shares of low cost carriers and increasing fuel prices (Hirsch & Macpherson 2003). The US Airways has twice entered bankruptcy protection and later avoided it after receiving concessions from the union

Labor relations in the airline industry

The main changes imposed by the Act were meant to prohibit secondary boycott and allow the union to exist under specified conditions in the Act. The Act also required the National Labor Relations Board to accord equal consideration to independent and affiliated unions. It also permitted the employer to file a representation petition, even in situations where one union seeks to represent the employees. The employees were also allowed to file a dissatisfaction petition in the determination of whether they want to keep their bargaining agent. The Act provided that the federal district courts could hear cases regarding collective bargaining and award damages for any aggrieved parties, including private parties.

Similarly, the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 1959 has provided a mandatory disclosure of the financial transactions and administrative roles of labor organizations and employers, as well as the protection of the funds and assets within the union (Hirsch, 2006). The Act also guarantees certain rights to all the members of the union, which are to be enforced and administered by the office of the Labor Management Standards.

The American airlines union is negotiating an agreement, lest workers go on strike amidst these multiple labor regulation laws. A second hearing of the airlines’ request for carriers’ collective bargaining agreement with the pilots is scheduled for September 4^th. Airlines in the US market enjoy the advantage of maintaining the financial strength, making labor relations contentious (Verma, 2005).

Ideally, the organizational campaign, unions, and employers are meant to attempt to surmount challenges of communication with workers and to protect unions’ adherents in the workplace. However, in disagreement, striking in itself is a protected activity. There must be authorization to strike as conducting strikes improperly or contrary to the law would inhibit the bargaining process. Strikes, in the meaning of unions’ policy, have been defined as authorized or ratified. Consequently, they are protected by the NLRA. Section 13 of the NLRA specifies that nothing within the law of that Act is meant to interfere with the right to strike. There are also prohibitions of the strikes during emergencies that affect the nation’s safety and health.

The employer may use his own economic weaponry and protect his bargaining position, especially in the case of the airline union mobilizing its members. In the American Ship Building company vs. NLRB, the Supreme Court indicated that the employers may lock out the demands of the workers under certain circumstances (Devinatz, 2013), mainly with the aim of protecting the collective bargaining position. This may also be used by the union as long as it is not used in a manner that intends to destroy the process. The test in the circumstances here is whether the union in the collective bargaining process continues to function, despite the employer’s lockout.

Airline labor strikes have exerted adverse impact on the economy given that airline labor contracts do not really expire, but reach an amendable date. The collective bargaining process between the airlines and the union involves a process of about five stages. In the first place, there has to be a negotiation process where the airline and the union exchange proposals to modify the existing contract.

This also marks direct negotiations that may involve other parties. If parties cannot settle the contract, then there is mediation from the National Mediation Board. The mediation may be invoked without the parties’ consent. If mediation fails, then arbitration will take effect where both the union and the airline must agree to arbitrate and the arbitration board convenes a meeting. If the parties fail to agree in all these stages, then there is an allowance of 30 days to allow the parties to rethink. After this period, the union may strike or take actions it considers fit and lawful.

The airline industry can boast of reduced strikes over the years. For instance, most of the major strikes were experienced before the 1990s. It may also be said that the labor regulations have shaped the industry, thus there are less causes to strike. When workers in the airline industry go on strike, several economic hiccups are experienced in the country (Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, 2012). The airline industry grapples with numerous effects of strikes, including missed opportunities making earnings due to reduced number of travelers and low spending levels among the few travelers who use their services. Sometimes the strikes cause other workers to be laid off, while airports suffer from a reduction in landing fees.

Conclusion

The airline industry, precisely the workers, has uncertain labor relations. It may prove difficult to implement and sustain the labor-cost structure that was formulated to address wages for contractual workers. This may lead to more problems between the labor unions and the employers, making the labor relations sour. However, hostile labor relations in the environment may not have a positive effect on the substantial effort to resolve labor disputes.

Reduced profitability to the extent of incurring losses is experienced by carriers when they abide by the demands of the labor unions. How the two parties play out is the critical determinant of the overall US airline industry. The labor relations must also be tuned up to the standard that is required to cure such employee-employer relations. Labor laws require a corresponding adjustment to ensure that airline disputes have a clear and consistent legal development on resolutions.

Changes in the labor laws must be implemented to ensure that the negative economic impact is reduced and eventually avoided. It has been observed that union strike effects are substantively negative, especially when there is a lack of managerial conduct in the unions themselves. To facilitate productive collective bargaining, the labor law must also address the issues in the unions and their mode of operations. The current labor conditions in the airline industry can, therefore, be resolved through amicable practice within and between the parties, as well as through considerable amendments to labor laws regulating this industry.

References

Chen, H. J., Kacperczyk, M., & Ortiz-Molina, H. (2011). Labor unions, operating flexibility, and the cost of equity. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 46(1) 21-58

DeMaura, S. (2012). Not just public unions: private sector unions hurting business. Web.

Devinatz, V. G. (2013). The crisis of US trade unionism and what needs to be done. Labor Law Journal, 64(1), 5-19.

Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (2012). What is grievance mediation? Web.

Hirsch, B. T. (2006). Wage determination in the U.S. Airline industry: Union power under product market constraints. IZA Discussion Paper No. 2384

Hirsch, B. T., & Macpherson, D. A. (2003). Union membership and coverage database from the current population survey: Note. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 56(2), 349-354

Verma, A. (2005). What do unions do to the workplace? Union impact on management and HRM. Web.