29 U.S.C. § 401

Congressional declaration of findings, purposes, and policy

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 29 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Standards for labor-management relations

The Congress finds that, in the public interest, it continues to be the responsibility of the Federal Government to protect employees’ rights to organize, choose their own representatives, bargain collectively, and otherwise engage in concerted activities for their mutual aid or protection; that the relations between employers and labor organizations and the millions of workers they represent have a substantial impact on the commerce of the Nation; and that in order to accomplish the objective of a free flow of commerce it is essential that labor organizations, employers, and their officials adhere to the highest standards of responsibility and ethical conduct in administering the affairs of their organizations, particularly as they affect labor-management relations.

(b) Protection of rights of employees and the public

The Congress further finds, from recent investigations in the labor and management fields, that there have been a number of instances of breach of trust, corruption, disregard of the rights of individual employees, and other failures to observe high standards of responsibility and ethical conduct which require further and supplementary legislation that will afford necessary protection of the rights and interests of employees and the public generally as they relate to the activities of labor organizations, employers, labor relations consultants, and their officers and representatives.

The Congress, therefore, further finds and declares that the enactment of this chapter is necessary to eliminate or prevent improper practices on the part of labor organizations, employers, labor relations consultants, and their officers and representatives which distort and defeat the policies of the Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, as amended [29 U.S.C. 141 et seq.], and the Railway Labor Act, as amended [45 U.S.C. 151 et seq.], and have the tendency or necessary effect of burdening or obstructing commerce by (1) impairing the efficiency, safety, or operation of the instrumentalities of commerce; (2) occurring in the current of commerce; (3) materially affecting, restraining, or controlling the flow of raw materials or manufactured or processed goods into or from the channels of commerce, or the prices of such materials or goods in commerce; or (4) causing diminution of employment and wages in such volume as substantially to impair or disrupt the market for goods flowing into or from the channels of commerce.

(Pub. L. 86–257, § 2, Sept. 14, 1959, 73 Stat. 519.)Editorial NotesReferences in Text

This chapter, referred to in subsec. (c), was in the original “this Act”, meaning Pub. L. 86–257, Sept. 14, 1959, 73 Stat. 519, known as the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, which enacted this chapter, amended sections 153, 158, 159, 160, 164, 186, and 187 of this title, and enacted provisions set out as notes under sections 153, 158, and 481 of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Short Title note set out below and Tables.

The Labor Management Relations Act, 1947, referred to in subsec. (c), is act June 23, 1947, ch. 120, 61 Stat. 136, which is classified principally to chapter 7 (§ 141 et seq.) of this title. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 141 of this title and Tables.

The Railway Labor Act, referred to in subsec. (c), is act May 20, 1926, ch. 347, 44 Stat. 577, which is classified principally to chapter 8 (§ 151 et seq.) of Title 45, Railroads. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see section 151 of Title 45 and Tables.

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesShort Title

Pub. L. 86–257, § 1, Sept. 14, 1959, 73 Stat. 519, provided that: “This Act [enacting this chapter, amending sections 153, 158, 159, 160, 164, 186, and 187 of this title, and enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 153, 158, and 481 of this title] may be cited as the ‘Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959’.”

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 785 cases (33 in the last 5 years), 1960–2026 · leading case: Local No. 82, Furniture & Piano Moving, Furniture Store Drivers, Helpers, Warehousemen & Packers v. Crowley, 467 U.S. 526 (1984).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Local No. 82, Furniture & Piano Moving, Furniture Store Drivers, Helpers, Warehousemen & Packers v. Crowley, 467 U.S. 526 (1984). · cites it 4× “522 , as amended, 29 U. S. C. § 401 et seq., was Congress' first major attempt to regulate the internal affairs of labor unions.”

Hall v. Cole, 412 U.S. 1 (1973). · cites it 4× “" 29 U. S. C. § 401 (b). In an effort to eliminate these abuses, Congress recognized that it was imperative that all union members be guaranteed at least "minimum standards of democratic process.”

Ray Marshall, Sec'y of Labor v. Local Union 20, Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen & Helpers of Com., 611 F.2d 645 (6th Cir. 1979). · cites it 8× “The Secretary of Labor brought this action pursuant to Title IV of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 (LMRDA or the Act), 29 U.S.C. §§ 401 et seq., to set aside the December 1977 election of Harold Leu as president of the International Brotherhood of…”

Pattern Makers' League v. Nat'l Labor Relations Bd., 473 U.S. 95 (1985). · cites it 4× “Furthermore, the legislative history of the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, 29 U. S. C. § 401 et seq., confirms that the proviso was intended to protect union rules involving admission and expulsion.”

Int'l Union, Sec., Police & Fire Professionals of Am. v. Faye, 828 F.3d 969 (D.C. Cir. 2016). · cites it 4× “See 29 U.S.C. § 401 (b) (explaining that Congress had found “a number of instances of breach of trust, corruption, disregard of the rights of individual employees, and other failures to observe high standards of responsibility and ethical conduct”).”

In Re Ben Carter, 618 F.2d 1093 (5th Cir. 1980). · cites it 3× “The International specifically mentioned three provisions of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959, 29 U.S.C. §§ 401 , 402, 411 (1976), and one provision of the Labor Management Relations Act, 29 U.”

Local 28 of the Sheet Metal Workers' Int'l Ass'n v. Equal Emp. Opportunity Comm'n, 478 U.S. 421 (1986). · cites it 2× “See 29 U. S. C. § 401 (a). Preliminarily, we note that while AAAPO gives the administrator broad powers to oversee petitioners' membership practices, Local 28 retains complete control over its other affairs.”

Warshauer v. Solis, 577 F.3d 1330 (11th Cir. 2009). · cites it 3× “29 U.S.C. § 401 (b). An important component of this protection were reporting requirements which would shed light on certain financial transactions.”

Finnegan v. Leu, 456 U.S. 431 (1982). · cites it 2× “519 , 29 U. S. C. § 401 et seq., and as a matter of retaliation, all union member-employees who opposed his candidacy.”

Breininger v. Sheet Metal Workers Int'l Ass'n Local Union No. 6, 493 U.S. 67 (1989). · cites it 2× “519 , 29 U. S. C. § 401 et seq. (1982 ed.), by discriminating against him in job referrals made by the union hiring hall; and second, whether the union's alleged refusal to refer him to employment through the hiring hall as a result of his political opposition to the union's…”

Brown v. Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders Int'l Union Local 54, 468 U.S. 491 (1984). · cites it 2× “, and the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act of 1959 *499 (LMRDA), 29 U. S. C. § 401 et seq., and that § 86(f) violates the Constitution because it is both overbroad and vague.”

Martin Marietta Corp. v. Lorenz, 823 P.2d 100 (Colo. 1992). · cites it 2× “1988), held that an employee's claim for wrongful discharge was cognizable where the employee alleged his discharge was the result of a refusal to participate in the embezzlement of union funds in violation of the Labor Management Reporting and Disclosure Act, 29 U.S.C. §§ 401…”

Show all 785 citing cases →

— 29 U.S.C. § 401(a) — 2 cases

Hodgson v. Chain Serv. Restaurant, Luncheonette & Soda Fountain Employees Union, Local 11, 355 F. Supp. 180 (S.D.N.Y. 1973).

Hodgson v. Chain Serv. Restaurant, L. & Sf Emp. U., L. 11, 355 F. Supp. 180 (S.D.N.Y. 1973).

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.