High on the agenda of changes sought by unions in federal labor-management law is the demand that there should be no distinction in the right of striking workers to return to their job whether the strike was an unfair labor practice strike or an economic strike

Question

a. What is the difference between these two types?
b. Should the rule be changed as demanded?

Answer 1

a. In an unfair labor practice strike, the employer is legally obliged to rehire the strikers when the strike ends, with no loss of seniority, and with the payment of wages not received during the walkout. In an economic strike, the employer may legally hire other workers as permanent replacements for the strikers. Only if the jobs again become available must the employer rehire the economic strikers, and only provided they have not already taken substantially equivalent permanent jobs elsewhere.
b. If the rule is changed, as demanded, it would give striking workers added strength or leverage in forcing concessions from employers. The strike, in effect, would become a paid vacation for workers who left their jobs, if and when the employer decided to resume operations. Presently, both the employer and the worker suffer economic losses while a strike or lockout continues. Moreover, in many, if not most strikes, it is practically impossible for the employer to hire enough suitable replacements to continue normal, profitable operations. Qualified workers are a major asset, costly to acquire and to train, and so most employers do not want to lose their services permanently.