Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 423.22 (2026)

Unlawful acts; legal or equitable remedy.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

EMPLOYMENT RELATIONS COMMISSION

Act 176 of 1939

423.22 Unlawful acts; legal or equitable remedy.

Sec. 22.

(1) It shall be unlawful for an employer to engage in a lockout or for a labor organization to engage in or instigate a strike without first having served notice as required in section 9.

(2) It shall be unlawful for any individual to instigate a lockout or strike that is unlawful under this section.

(3) Any person may pursue any appropriate legal or equitable remedy or other relief in any circuit court having jurisdiction with respect to any act or conduct in violation of any of the provisions of this act, except subsection (1) and sections 14(4), 16, and 17a. The existence of a criminal penalty with respect to any such act or conduct does not preclude appropriate equitable relief.

History: Add. 1947, Act 318, Eff. Oct. 11, 1947 ;-- CL 1948, 423.22 ;-- Am. 1949, Act 230, Imd. Eff. May 31, 1949 ;-- Am. 1965, Act 282, Imd. Eff. July 22, 1965 ;-- Am. 1978, Act 250, Imd. Eff. June 20, 1978 ;-- Am. 2012, Act 348, Eff. Mar. 28, 2013

Compiler's Notes:

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

Cited in 5 cases, 1949–2004 · leading case: Mann v. Shusteric Enter., Inc, 683 N.W.2d 573 (Mich. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Mann v. Shusteric Enter., Inc, 683 N.W.2d 573 (Mich. 2004). · cites it 2× “[2] Plaintiff's expert testified that given plaintiff's ingestion of so much alcohol, it was highly improbable that plaintiff could "mask" the degree of his intoxication. The expert apparently concluded that plaintiff was "visibly intoxicated.”

Gen. Teamsters Union, Local No. 406 v. Uptown Cleaners & Hatters, Inc., 97 N.W.2d 593 (Mich. 1959). · cites it 3× “*246 It may be noted, also, that section 22 of the mediation act, as amended (CLS 1956, § 423.22 [Stat Ann 1950 Rev § 17.454(23)]), does not support the claim of right to specific performance advanced in the present case.”

Metro. Detroit Plumbing & Mech. Contractors Ass'n v. Michigan Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 317 N.W.2d 649 (Mich. Ct. App. 1982). “MCL 423.22; MSA 17.454(23) specifically provides that institution of a lockout without provision of the requisite notice is unlawful.”

Int'l Union of United Auto. v. Wayne Prosecuting Attorney, 325 Mich. 250 (Mich. 1949). “Section 22 of the act (CL 1948, § 423.22) in part reads: “Any person who either individually or as 1 of a group of persons instigates a strike, or who shall call or cause a strike to be placed in effect, * * * while mediation is pending, * * * or while an election is pending, *…”

Metro. Detroit Plumbing & Mech. Contractors Ass'n v. Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 105 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 55,675 (Mich. 1986). · cites it 2× “MCL 423.22; MSA 17.454(23) specifically provides that institution of a lockout without provision of the requisite notice is unlawful.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 423.22(a)(1) — 1 case

Metro. Detroit Plumbing & Mech. Contractors Ass'n v. Emp. Sec. Comm'n, 105 Lab. Cas. (CCH) 55,675 (Mich. 1986). “MCL 423.22; MSA 17.454(23) specifically provides that institution of a lockout without provision of the requisite notice is unlawful.”

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.