The document analyzes weaknesses in the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) and its amendment, the Taft-Hartley Act, that limit workers' rights to unionize and collectively bargain. It argues that employees of religious organizations and certain categories of workers should be extended protections under the NLRA. It also contends that provisions that restrict strikes, boycotts, and picketing undermine workers' bargaining power and should be reformed or removed to better balance the interests of employers and employees.

1. 1
Amanda Sheldon
Analytical Essay of the NLRA
The National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. § 151–169), better known as the NLRA, created in
1935 gave unions recognition as representatives of laborers. This allowed an exclusive
bargaining agent of the union to negotiate with their employer. This bargaining agent represents
all workers equally as a whole. However, there are weaknesses within the NLRA that hinder
workers’ rights. Senator Robert Wagner once noted in 1935 that “Democracy cannot work unless
it is honored in the factory as well as in the polling booth; workers cannot truly be free in body
and spirit unless their freedom extends into places where they earn their daily bread.” This essay
will outline the shortcomings of the NLRA and discuss possible ways that these issues could be
resolved so that workers can experience this actual freedom that Wagner so eloquently described.
One of the weaknesses is that employees of religiously affiliated establishments are excluded
from the protection of the NLRA because of the separation of church and state. The 1947 Taft-
Hartley Act (80 H.R. 3020, Pub.L. 80–101, 61 Stat. 136, enacted June 23, 1947), which amended
the NLRA, also seriously limits the way workers negotiate with their employers.
Section 202 of the Act limits the workers’ negotiation rights to strike and picket. Section 208
gave district courts the right to stop a strike or interrupt a lockout in their jurisdiction if it utterly
stalled the productivity of the company. Section 214 allows certain laborers to be paid less than
minimum wage. Finally, Section 303 prevents workers from boycotting their employer or aiding
in a boycott.
As previously stated, employees of religiously affiliated organizations are exempt from the
NLRA. This includes employees at non-for-profit church daycare facilities, teachers at faith-

2. 2
based schools, and also employees of churches. These employers are often also exempt from
state law requirements, such as minimum wage, regulated break times, overtime pay, and health
insurance benefits. As a result, these employers are completely allowed to cheat their employees
and the employees don’t even have the option of formulating a union in order to negotiate fairer
labor practices.
In instances like these, these employees do not have a resource for help or a governing body to
turn to. Their only option of overcoming these unfair labor practices (ULP) is to find work
elsewhere. I know this situation firsthand, as I was once employed by a church preschool. I faced
all of these ULPs on a daily basis. I would work 10 hour days without a break for less than
minimum wage, I did not get paid overtime, was uninsured, and did not receive time off. The
employer was more than happy to have these “loopholes” that allowed them to fun their business
freely, unethically, and cheaply.
It is for these reasons that these workers of faith-based establishments should be protected under
the NLRA. However, protection would borderline on violating the separation of church and state.
To rectify this complex situation, employees of religiously affiliated businesses should have the
option to form a union among themselves, create a bargaining agent, and that agent should apply
to The Labor Board to be recognized as a union and protected under NLRA. These applications
should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. It will be up to The Board to look at the factors and
determine if the organization operates like an average business. For example, if the business
produces revenue, is taxed, has over a certain number of employees, and has a clientele, then
they should be categorized under the same category as qualifying businesses under the NLRA.
This way, the fact that it is religiously based is a non-issue.

3. 3
However, some religiously based organizations would not meet the criteria and their workers’
application would be denied. This ensures that it does not cross separation of church and state. If
the organization qualifies and their union gets approved, this allows the employees to have
bargaining power and be free of the ULPs, and it prevents the employer from benefiting from
these loopholes while hiding under the cloak of religion.
Section 202 of Taft-Hartley Act strived to create a balance between employers and their
employees. This Section created the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, which acts as a
middleman to mediate the issues between workers and their employers. This was created to
lessen the disruption of everyday business, solve conflict quickly, and to limit profits lost by the
business. However, the presence of a mediator limited the workers’ rights of negotiation by way
of picketing and going on strike.
The Act was put in place mostly to protect the rights of the employer and to help them not lose
profits during negotiation. Even though profit loss is an important aspect and the employer also
needs protecting, lowering the rights to strike and picket lowers the impact of the workers’
message. The whole point of strike is to disrupt business, lower profits, and show the
dissatisfaction of the employees. If the employers aren’t hurting financially, they have no
motivation to change.
It is for these reasons that the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service should be
disassembled. The union bargaining unit should be able to peacefully negotiate directly with the
employer while being prepared to take the necessary steps to gain results. The issues can still be
handled fast and peacefully as the employer will have the most motivation for results.

4. 4
Section 208 dovetails off of the same idea as Section 202, in that if normal business operations
are severely hindered, then the district courts have a right to put a stop to a strike or lockout in
their jurisdiction. This district court right also prevents the effectiveness of the strike or lockout.
This actually prevents results, as the strike being intervened and halted is not the same as being
resolved. Once again, if the business is truly suffering, it will work towards a compromise.
Section 214 allows certain peoples to be paid less than minimum wage. This group includes
students, the handicap, messengers, and apprentices. This is an obvious injustice as these peoples
often work the hardest. They mostly work under the same conditions for a comparable amount of
time, and are not granted the same protection as their non-restricted counterpart.
The result for this inequality is similar to the issue regarding the religiously based employees.
These special workers should apply with The Labor Board to be recognized as an average
employee and be protected under the NLRA. This is done so that the person may be evaluated on
a case-by-case basis as well. These applications must be evaluated separately because they
should also have their own separate set of criteria. For example, if the employee is fulltime, does
comparable work under comparable conditions, and has been an employee for more than 90
days, they should qualify to be fully recognized. This prevents workers that really aren’t working
under the same restraints from getting the NLRA protection that they actually don’t deserve.
Finally, Section 303 prevents laborers from boycotting their employer or encouraging others to
do so. This action is referred to as secondary boycotts, and it is when a union encourages a
neutral party to stop doing business with their employer. This is another example of how the law
is meant to protect the employer. Boycotting and secondary boycotting are powerful tactics used
by unions to get results. This strongly impedes the initial reason for the boycott. Once again, if

5. 5
employers are suffering financially and within their business relationships, they will be more
prone to cooperate with the union.
To correct this situation, direct boycotting by the union should be admissible. Secondary
boycotting should continue to not be allowed, as that tactic can cause irreversible damage to the
company and in turn, their employees. The point of strikes, picketing, and boycotts is to
temporarily cause an inconvenience for the employer. However, aiding in other agents
boycotting the employer could not as easily be repaired.
In conclusion, the National Labor Relations Act was created from scratch 78 years ago and
amended more than 66 years ago. The Act sought to correct the imperfections of the NLRA,
however it is apparent that a few more corrections are needed in order for Wagner’s vision to
reach reality—one in which “freedom extends into places where they earn their daily bread.”