10 U.S.C. § 976

Membership in military unions, organizing of military unions, and recognition of military unions prohibited

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 10 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) In this section:(1) The term “member of the armed forces” means (A) a member of the armed forces who is serving on active duty, (B) a member of the National Guard who is serving on full-time National Guard duty, or (C) a member of a Reserve component or the Space Force while performing inactive-duty training.(2) The term “military labor organization” means any organization that engages in or attempts to engage in—(A) negotiating or bargaining with any civilian officer or employee, or with any member of the armed forces, on behalf of members of the armed forces, concerning the terms or conditions of military service of such members in the armed forces;(B) representing individual members of the armed forces before any civilian officer or employee, or any member of the armed forces, in connection with any grievance or complaint of any such member arising out of the terms or conditions of military service of such member in the armed forces; or(C) striking, picketing, marching, demonstrating, or any other similar form of concerted action which is directed against the Government of the United States and which is intended to induce any civilian officer or employee, or any member of the armed forces, to—(i) negotiate or bargain with any person concerning the terms or conditions of military service of any member of the armed forces,(ii) recognize any organization as a representative of individual members of the armed forces in connection with complaints and grievances of such members arising out of the terms or conditions of military service of such members in the armed forces, or(iii) make any change with respect to the terms or conditions of military service of individual members of the armed forces.(3) The term “civilian officer or employee” means an employee, as such term is defined in section 2105 of title 5.(b) It shall be unlawful for a member of the armed forces, knowing of the activities or objectives of a particular military labor organization—(1) to join or maintain membership in such organization; or(2) to attempt to enroll any other member of the armed forces as a member of such organization.(c) It shall be unlawful for any person—(1) to enroll in a military labor organization any member of the armed forces or to solicit or accept dues or fees for such an organization from any member of the armed forces; or(2) to negotiate or bargain, or attempt through any coercive act to negotiate or bargain, with any civilian officer or employee, or any member of the armed forces, on behalf of members of the armed forces, concerning the terms or conditions of service of such members;(3) to organize or attempt to organize, or participate in, any strike, picketing, march, demonstration, or other similar form of concerted action involving members of the armed forces that is directed against the Government of the United States and that is intended to induce any civilian officer or employee, or any member of the armed forces, to—(A) negotiate or bargain with any person concerning the terms or conditions of service of any member of the armed forces,(B) recognize any military labor organization as a representative of individual members of the armed forces in connection with any complaint or grievance of any such member arising out of the terms or conditions of service of such member in the armed forces, or(C) make any change with respect to the terms or conditions of service in the armed forces of individual members of the armed forces; or(4) to use any military installation, facility, reservation, vessel, or other property of the United States for any meeting, march, picketing, demonstration, or other similar activity for the purpose of engaging in any activity prohibited by this subsection or by subsection (b) or (d).(d) It shall be unlawful for any military labor organization to represent, or attempt to represent, any member of the armed forces before any civilian officer or employee, or any member of the armed forces, in connection with any grievance or complaint of any such member arising out of the terms or conditions of service of such member in the armed forces.(e) No member of the armed forces, and no civilian officer or employee, may—(1) negotiate or bargain on behalf of the United States concerning the terms or conditions of military service of members of the armed forces with any person who represents or purports to represent members of the armed forces, or(2) permit or authorize the use of any military installation, facility, reservation, vessel, or other property of the United States for any meeting, march, picketing, demonstration, or other similar activity which is for the purpose of engaging in any activity prohibited by subsection (b), (c), or (d).Nothing in this subsection shall prevent commanders or supervisors from giving consideration to the views of any member of the armed forces presented individually or as a result of participation on command-sponsored or authorized advisory councils, committees, or organizations.(f) Whoever violates subsection (b), (c), or (d) shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, except that, in the case of an organization (as defined in section 18 of such title), the fine shall not be less than $25,000.(g) Nothing in this section shall limit the right of any member of the armed forces—(1) to join or maintain membership in any organization or association not constituting a “military labor organization” as defined in subsection (a)(2) of this section;(2) to present complaints or grievances concerning the terms or conditions of the service of such member in the armed forces in accordance with established military procedures;(3) to seek or receive information or counseling from any source;(4) to be represented by counsel in any legal or quasi-legal proceeding, in accordance with applicable laws and regulations;(5) to petition the Congress for redress of grievances; or(6) to take such other administrative action to seek such administrative or judicial relief, as is authorized by applicable laws and regulations.(Added Pub. L. 95–610, § 2(a), Nov. 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 3085, § 975; renumbered § 976, Pub. L. 96–107, title VIII, § 821(a), Nov. 9, 1979, 93 Stat. 820; amended Pub. L. 98–525, title IV, § 414(a)(6), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2519; Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title XIII, § 1343(a)(2), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3992; Pub. L. 100–26, § 7(k)(2), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 284; Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title X, § 1073(a)(15), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1900; Pub. L. 118–31, div. A, title XVII, § 1741(b)(3), Dec. 22, 2023, 137 Stat. 680.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2023—Subsec. (a)(1)(C). Pub. L. 118–31 inserted “or the Space Force” after “member of a Reserve component”.

1997—Subsec. (f). Pub. L. 105–85 substituted “shall be fined under title 18 or imprisoned not more than 5 years, or both, except that, in the case of an organization (as defined in section 18 of such title), the fine shall not be less than $25,000.” for “shall, in the case of an individual, be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both, and in the case of an organization or association, be fined not less than $25,000 and not more than $250,000.”

1987—Subsec. (a)(1) to (3). Pub. L. 100–26 inserted “The term” after each par. designation and struck out uppercase letter of first word after first quotation marks in each paragraph and substituted lowercase letter.

1986—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 99–661 struck out the second of two commas before “(B)”.

1984—Subsec. (a)(1). Pub. L. 98–525 added cl. (B) and redesignated existing cl. (B) as (C).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesFindings; Purpose

Pub. L. 95–610, § 1, Nov. 8, 1978, 92 Stat. 3085, provided that:“(a) The Congress makes the following findings:“(1) Members of the armed forces of the United States must be prepared to fight and, if necessary, to die to protect the welfare, security, and liberty of the United States and of their fellow citizens.“(2) Discipline and prompt obedience to lawful orders of superior officers are essential and time-honored elements of the American military tradition and have been reinforced from the earliest articles of war by laws and regulations prohibiting conduct detrimental to the military chain of command and lawful military authority.“(3) The processes of conventional collective bargaining and labor-management negotiation cannot and should not be applied to the relationships between members of the armed forces and their military and civilian superiors.“(4) Strikes, slowdowns, picketing, and other traditional forms of job action have no place in the armed forces.“(5) Unionization of the armed forces would be incompatible with the military chain of command, would undermine the role, authority, and position of the commander, and would impair the morale and readiness of the armed forces.“(6) The circumstances which could constitute a threat to the ability of the armed forces to perform their mission are not comparable to the circumstances which could constitute a threat to the ability of Federal civilian agencies to perform their functions and should be viewed in light of the need for effective performance of duty by each member of the armed forces.“(b) The purpose of this Act [enacting this section] is to promote the readiness of the armed forces to defend the United States.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1982–2022 · leading case: United States v. Brown, 45 M.J. 389 (C.A.A.F. 1996).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Brown, 45 M.J. 389 (C.A.A.F. 1996). · cites it 12× “As a result of his actions, appellant was charged with a violation of 10 USC § 976 , which provides: (c) It shall be unlawful for any person— (3) to organize or attempt to organize, or participate in, any strike, picketing, *393 march, demonstration, or other similar form of…”

United States v. Aleman, 62 M.J. 281 (C.A.A.F. 2006). · cites it 2× “1996) (the majority rejected appellant’s argument challenging the anti-union statute, 10 U.S.C. § 976 , and noted that “[a]n alternative ground for upholding appellant’s conviction would be to affirm the conviction for an offense closely related to the offense charged”); United…”

Nicely v. United States, 23 F.4th 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2022). “” 10 U.S.C. § 976 (a)(1). Elsewhere in Title 10, “active duty” is defined as “full-time duty in the active military service of the United States.”

Ass'n of Civilian Technicians v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 250 F.3d 778 (D.C. Cir. 2001). · cites it 3× “This conclusion was based on the Authority’s consideration of three statutory provisions: 10 U.S.C. § 976 (c)(2), which prohibits bargaining with, or on behalf of, members of the armed forces, concerning the terms or conditions of their service; § 7117(a)(1) of the Federal…”

Ass'n of Civilian Technicians, Montana Air Chapter v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 756 F.2d 172 (D.C. Cir. 1985). “See 10 U.S.C. § 976 (1982). 45 . See S.Rep. No.”

Ass'n of Civilian Technicians v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 370 F.3d 1214 (D.C. Cir. 2004). · cites it 2× “§§ 7102 , 7114 with 10 U.S.C. § 976 ; see Ass’n of Civilian Technicians, Wichita Air Capitol Chapter v.”

United States v. Pete, 39 M.J. 521 (1994). · cites it 4× “3 See 10 U.S.C. § 976 (1988) [hereinafter Section 976].”

Ass'n of Civilian Technicians v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 360 F.3d 195 (D.C. Cir. 2004). · cites it 4× “Relying on that law, 10 U.S.C. § 976 (2000), the Federal Labor Relations Authority declined to order the Guard to bargain over a union proposal concerning military training duties assigned to Na *283 tional Guard technicians who serve as both civilian employees and military…”

Ass'n of Civilian Technicians v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 230 F.3d 377 (D.C. Cir. 2000). · cites it 3× “10 U.S.C. § 976 (c). The issue in this case is whether, in view of § 976(c), the Federal Labor Relations Authority correctly refused to order bargaining over the following proposal sponsored by the technicians’ union: If the [National Guard Bureau] decides to afford bargaining…”

United States v. Brown, 41 M.J. 504 (A.C.C.A. 1994). · cites it 2× “Although the appellant has asserted several issues, 1 the key issues on appeal are whether the evidence presented at trial was factually and legally sufficient to sustain the conviction; whether the statute prohibiting military labor union activities is constitutional (see 10…”

The Ohio Adjutant Gen.'s Dep't v. Fed. Lab. Relations Auth., 21 F.4th 401 (6th Cir. 2021). “The legislative history of 10 U.S.C. § 976 , which prohibits military unions, also supports this reading.”

Illinois Nat'l Guard v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 854 F.2d 1396 (D.C. Cir. 1988). “See also 10 U.S.C. § 976 (1982). This evidence ill-serves the FLRA in this case, however.”

Show all 15 citing cases →

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.