29 U.S.C. § 157
Right of employees as to organization, collective bargaining, etc.
Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection, and shall also have the right to refrain from any or all of such activities except to the extent that such right may be affected by an agreement requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment as authorized in section 158(a)(3) of this title.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3,037
cases (190 in the last 5 years), 1936–2026 · leading case: Stephen Morris v. Ernst & Young
Stephen Morris v. Ernst & Young (2016)
“…employees have the right to pursue work-related legal claims together. 29 U.S.C. § 157 ; Eastex, Inc. v. NLRB, <a href="/opinion/109913/eastex-inc-v-national-labor-relations-board/#566" aria-description="Citation for case: Eastex, Inc. v. National Labor Rela”
Epic Systems Corp. v. Lewis (2018)
“, and to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection,” 29 U. S. C. §157 .”
National Labor Relations Board v. Alternative Entertainment, Inc. (2017)
“…the purpose of collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection. . . .” 29 U.S.C. § 157 . Section 8 states that, “It shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer . . . to interfere with, restrain, or coerce employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed in…”
Jacob Lewis v. Epic Systems Corporation (2016)
“” 29 U.S.C. § 157 . Section 8 enforces Section 7 unconditionally by deeming that it “shall be an unfair labor practice for an employer .”
Bekele v. Lyft, Inc. (2016)
“29 U.S.C. § 157 (emphasis added). 19 The FAA provides that valid written arbitration agreements shall be enforceable “save upon such grounds as exist at law or in equity for the revocation of any contract.”
D.R. Horton, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board (2013)
“…condition of employment as authorized in section 158(a)(3) of this title. 29 U.S.C. § 157 (emphasis added). The Board deemed it well-settled that the NLRA protects the right of employees to improve their working conditions through administrative and judicial forums. Taking…”
BE&K Construction Co. v. National Labor Relations Board (2002)
“29 U. S. C. §§ 157 , 158(a)(1). A three-member panel of the Board addressed crossmotions for summary judgment and ruled in favor of the general counsel.”
National Labor Relations Board v. City Disposal Systems, Inc. (1984)
“140 , 29 U. S. C. § 157 . [2] The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or Board) held that Brown's refusal was concerted activity within § 7, and that his discharge was, therefore, an unfair labor practice under § 8(a)(1) of the Act, 61 Stat.”
Brown v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders International Union Local 54 (1984)
“452 , as amended, 29 U. S. C. § 157 , the provision involved in this case, neither contains explicit pre-emptive language nor otherwise indicates a congressional intent to usurp the entire field of labor-management relations.”
Convergys Corp. v. National Labor Relations Board (2017)
“…condition of employment as authorized in section 158(a)(3) of this title. 29 U.S.C. § 157 . The threshold question in this case is whether Section 7’s guarantee of the right “to engage in other concerted activities for the purpose of . . . other mutual aid or protection”…”
California Grocers Assn. v. City of Los Angeles (2011)
“67-69 [preempting a statute that effectively limited employer speech about union organizing, where Congress in §§ 7, 8(a), 8(b), and 8(c) of the NLRA ( 29 U.S.C. §§ 157 , 158(a), (b), (c)) already had regulated the extent to which employer speech should be permitted]; Golden…”
Hudgens v. National Labor Relations Board (1976)
“employees' rights under § 7 of the National Labor Relations Act, 29 U. S. C. § 157 . In explaining why it addresses any constitutional issue at all, the Court observes simply that the history of the litigation has been one of "shifting positions on the part of the litigants, the…”
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.