EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION
Act 176 of 1939
423.1 Declaration of public policy.
Sec. 1.
It is hereby declared as the public policy of this state that the best interests of the people of the state are served by preventing or promptly settling labor disputes; that strikes and lockouts and other forms of industrial strife, regardless of where the merits of the controversy lie, are forces productive ultimately of economic waste; that the interests and rights of the consumers and the people of the state, while not direct parties thereto, should always be considered, respected and protected; and that the voluntary mediation of such disputes under the guidance and supervision of a governmental agency will tend to promote permanent industrial peace and the health, welfare, comfort and safety of the people of the state.
History: 1939, Act 176, Imd. Eff. June 8, 1939 ;-- CL 1948, 423.1 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 348, Eff. Mar. 28, 2013 ;-- Am. 2023, Act 8, Eff. Feb. 13, 2024
Constitutionality Notes:
Michigan's labor mediation law was held invalid where it conflicted with provisions of the national labor relations act. International Union of United Automobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Implement Workers of America, CIO v O'Brien, Prosecuting Attorney, 339 US 454; 70 S Ct 781; 94 L Ed 978 (1949).
Compiler's Notes:
For transfer of powers and duties relating to promulgation of rules by the employment relations commission from the department of labor to the director of the department of consumer and industry services, see E.R.O. No. 1996-2, compiled at MCL 445.2001 of the Michigan Compiled Laws.
Enacting section 1 of Act 348 of 2012 provides:
"Enacting section 1. If any part or parts of this act are found to be in conflict with the state constitution of 1963, the United States constitution, or federal law, this act shall be implemented to the maximum extent that the state constitution of 1963, the United States constitution, and federal law permit. Any provision held invalid or inoperative shall be severable from the remaining portions of this act."
Notes of Decisions
City of Ann Arbor v. Am. Fed'n of State Employees Local 369, 771 N.W.2d 843 (Mich. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 5× “” MCL 423.1. In furtherance of this policy, the Legislature has provided: (1) Any labor dispute, other than a representation question, may lawfully be submitted to voluntary arbitration in the manner provided in this section.”
Rowry v. Univ. of Michigan, 490 N.W.2d 305 (Mich. 1992).
· cites it 10× “The act provides procedures for parties to submit disputes to voluntary arbitration. [2] After an arbitration award has been rendered, the award is "enforceable at law or in equity as the agreement of the parties.”
Goolsby v. City of Detroit, 358 N.W.2d 856 (Mich. 1984).
· cites it 2× “Similarly, our labor mediation act, MCL 423.1 et seq.; MSA 17.454(1) et seq., and public employment relations act, MCL 423.”
Detroit Fire Fighters Assoc. v. City of Detroit, 293 N.W.2d 278 (Mich. 1980).
· cites it 3× “Pre-arbitral deferral was described as advancing the "declared * * * public policy of this state” evidenced in § 1 of the labor mediation act (LMA), MCL 423.1; MSA 17.454(1), "to promote the prevention or prompt settlement of labor disputes and other forms of industrial strife”,…”
Smith v. Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 301 N.W.2d 285 (Mich. 1981).
· cites it 2× “This goal is codified in the labor mediation act, MCL 423.1; MSA 17.454(1): "It is hereby declared as the public policy of this state that the best interests of the people of the state are served by the prevention or prompt settlement of labor disputes; that strikes and lockouts…”
Judges of the 74th Jud. Dist. v. Bay Cnty., 190 N.W.2d 219 (Mich. 1971).
· cites it 2× “The defendant Michigan Employment Relations Commission (formerly known as the Michigan Labor Mediation Board) is an administrative agency of the State of Michigan created pursuant to MCLA §423.1 et seq. (Stat Ann 1968 Rev § 17.”
Demings v. City of Ecorse, 377 N.W.2d 275 (Mich. 1985).
· cites it 2× “, and by the national labor policies which those statutes implement impliedly impose on labor organizations representing private sector employees a duty of fair representation.”
Detroit Police Officers Ass'n v. Detroit, 551 N.W.2d 349 (Mich. 1996).
· cites it 2× “§ 423.1; M.S.A. § 17.454(1).] The MERC has been endowed with a large amount of power to help it facilitate the resolution of labor disputes.”
Gen. Teamsters Union, Local No. 406 v. Uptown Cleaners & Hatters, Inc., 97 N.W.2d 593 (Mich. 1959).
· cites it 4× “We believe the issues presented by this record are: (1) Is plaintiff the representative of a majority of the 9 driver-salesmen employed by defendants? (2) Did the chancellor have power, under the agreement between the parties and the terms of the labor mediation act (CL 1948 and…”
Toth v. Callaghan, 995 F. Supp. 2d 774 (E.D. Mich. 2014).
· cites it 2× “GEO argued that all three categories of graduate student assistants were “public employees” under the Public Employment Relations Act (“PERA”), Mich. Comp. Laws § 423.1 et seq., and were thus entitled to collective bargaining rights.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.