§
Subdivision 1.Employees' right of self-organization.
Employees shall have the right of self-organization and the right to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in lawful, concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection; and such employees shall have the right to refrain from any and all such activities.
§
Subd. 2.Employers associations.
Employers have the right to associate together for the purpose of collective bargaining.
Notes of Decisions
Capra v. Carpenter Paper Co., 104 N.W.2d 532 (Minn. 1960).
· cites it 2× “That notice included the statement that: “These Employers, for the past several years, have availed themselves of their right under Section 179.10, subdivision 2, of the Minnesota Labor Relations Act, to associate together for the purpose of collective bargaining and each year…”
Dayton Co. v. Carpet, Linoleum & Resilient Floor Decorators' Union, 39 N.W.2d 183 (Minn. 1949).
“§ 179.10. 4 It gives to a *93 majority of the employes of an appropriate unit power to select a bargaining representative, and such, representative thereupon becomes the exclusive bargaining representative for all employes of the unit, but it reserves to individual employes or…”
Faribault Daily News, Inc. v. Int'l Typographical Union, 53 N.W.2d 36 (Minn. 1952).
· cites it 3× “” Minnesota has a similar statute, § 179.10, subd. 1, which reads: “Employees shall have the right of self-organization and the right to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in lawful,…”
McQuay, Inc. v. Int'l Union, 72 N.W.2d 81 (Minn. 1955).
· cites it 3× “rsons or parties to plaintiff unknown, but acting in concert with or as agents or representatives of said defendants, have intimidated and coerced plaintiff’s employees, former employees, and prospective *276 employees, in violation of the statutes as hereinbefore alleged and in…”
State ex rel. Dison v. Hanson, 78 N.W.2d 679 (Minn. 1956).
“This does not mean, however, that the employer cannot question the employees so long as there is no interference with the right of self-organization and the right to bargain collectively guaranteed to the employees in § 179.10, subd. 1. So much the relators admit but contend…”
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.