1969The Yale Law JournalRequires access

The Limits of Collective Bargaining in Public Employment

Harry H. Wellington, Ralph K. Winter

Open publisher page 51 citations

Abstract

Good lawyers are good critics. The nature of their discipline makes this skill necessary, and the content of their work brings it inevitably to bear upon doctrines and concepts laboriously constructed by their predecessors. In approaching questions involving collective bargaining and public employment, union lawyers and academic commentators have for some years been criticizing the concept of the sovereignty of the public employer, and its offspring, the doctrine of the illegal delegation of power. These two lawyer-made constructs once had imposed formidable obstacles to collective bargaining in the public sector of our economy. But this criticism, vastly strengthened by the changing nature of government employment and the ever visible example of collective bargaining in the private sector, has led to a liberalized common law and a growing body of enacted law and has reduced to a whisper the counsel of restraint voiced by these constructs.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Good lawyers are good critics. The nature of their discipline makes this skill necessary, and the content of their work brings it inevitably to bear upon doctrines and concepts laboriously constructed by their predecessors. In approaching questions involving collective bargaining and public employment, union lawyers and academic commentators have for some years been criticizing the concept of the sovereignty of the public employer, and its offspring, the doctrine of the illegal delegation of power. These two lawyer-made constructs once had imposed formidable obstacles to collective bargaining in the public sector of our economy. But this criticism, vastly strengthened by the changing nature of government employment and the ever visible example of collective bargaining in the private sector, has led to a liberalized common law and a growing body of enacted law and has reduced to a whisper the counsel of restraint voiced by these constructs.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 51 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Good lawyers are good critics. The nature of their discipline makes this skill necessary, and the content of their work brings it inevitably to bear upon doctrines and concepts laboriously constructed by their predecessors. In approaching questions involving collective bargaining and public employment, union lawyers and academic commentators have for some years been criticizing the concept of the sovereignty of the public employer, and its offspring, the doctrine of the illegal delegation of power. These two lawyer-made constructs once had imposed formidable obstacles to collective bargaining in the public sector of our economy. But this criticism, vastly strengthened by the changing nature of government employment and the ever visible example of collective bargaining in the private sector, has led to a liberalized common law and a growing body of enacted law and has reduced to a whisper the counsel of restraint voiced by these constructs.

Key concepts: Collective bargaining, Labour economics, Bargaining power, Business, Economics, Microeconomics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
The Limits of Collective Bargaining in Public Employment — Research Paper | ScholarLens