5 U.S.C. § 7120

Standards of conduct for labor organizations

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) An agency shall only accord recognition to a labor organization that is free from corrupt influences and influences opposed to basic democratic principles. Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, an organization is not required to prove that it is free from such influences if it is subject to governing requirements adopted by the organization or by a national or international labor organization or federation of labor organizations with which it is affiliated, or in which it participates, containing explicit and detailed provisions to which it subscribes calling for—(1) the maintenance of democratic procedures and practices including provisions for periodic elections to be conducted subject to recognized safeguards and provisions defining and securing the right of individual members to participate in the affairs of the organization, to receive fair and equal treatment under the governing rules of the organization, and to receive fair process in disciplinary proceedings;(2) the exclusion from office in the organization of persons affiliated with communist or other totalitarian movements and persons identified with corrupt influences;(3) the prohibition of business or financial interests on the part of organization officers and agents which conflict with their duty to the organization and its members; and(4) the maintenance of fiscal integrity in the conduct of the affairs of the organization, including provisions for accounting and financial controls and regular financial reports or summaries to be made available to members.(b) Notwithstanding the fact that a labor organization has adopted or subscribed to standards of conduct as provided in subsection (a) of this section, the organization is required to furnish evidence of its freedom from corrupt influences or influences opposed to basic democratic principles if there is reasonable cause to believe that—(1) the organization has been suspended or expelled from, or is subject to other sanction, by a parent labor organization, or federation of organizations with which it had been affiliated, because it has demonstrated an unwillingness or inability to comply with governing requirements comparable in purpose to those required by subsection (a) of this section; or(2) the organization is in fact subject to influences that would preclude recognition under this chapter.(c) A labor organization which has or seeks recognition as a representative of employees under this chapter shall file financial and other reports with the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Labor Management Relations, provide for bonding of officials and employees of the organization, and comply with trusteeship and election standards.(d) The Assistant Secretary shall prescribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out the purposes of this section. Such regulations shall conform generally to the principles applied to labor organizations in the private sector. Complaints of violations of this section shall be filed with the Assistant Secretary. In any matter arising under this section, the Assistant Secretary may require a labor organization to cease and desist from violations of this section and require it to take such actions as he considers appropriate to carry out the policies of this section.(e) This chapter does not authorize participation in the management of a labor organization or acting as a representative of a labor organization by a management official, a supervisor, or a confidential employee, except as specifically provided in this chapter, or by an employee if the participation or activity would result in a conflict or apparent conflict of interest or would otherwise be incompatible with law or with the official duties of the employee.(f) In the case of any labor organization which by omission or commission has willfully and intentionally, with regard to any strike, work stoppage, or slowdown, violated section 7116(b)(7) of this title, the Authority shall, upon an appropriate finding by the Authority of such violation—(1) revoke the exclusive recognition status of the labor organization, which shall then immediately cease to be legally entitled and obligated to represent employees in the unit; or(2) take any other appropriate disciplinary action.(Added Pub. L. 95–454, title VII, § 701, Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1210.)Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 13, 1978, see section 907 of Pub. L. 95–454, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 1101 of this title.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 17 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1981–2024 · leading case: Elaine Chao, Sec'y of Labor, United States Dep't of Labor v. Bremerton Metal Trades Council, Afl-Cio, 294 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Elaine Chao, Sec'y of Labor, United States Dep't of Labor v. Bremerton Metal Trades Council, Afl-Cio, 294 F.3d 1114 (9th Cir. 2002). · cites it 4× “However, the LMRDA permits the Secretary to bring an action challenging candidacy requirements on behalf of an aggrieved union member, whereas the CSRA does not provide for a judicial remedy to challenge a union election or other allegedly unfair labor practices.”

Gutierrez v. Flores, 543 F.3d 248 (5th Cir. 2008). “” 5 U.S.C. § 7120 (a)(3); see also 29 C.F.R.”

Laity v. Beatty, 766 F. Supp. 92 (W.D.N.Y. 1991). · cites it 7× “Lastly, with respect to Laity’s due process claim the Acting Regional Director found this claim within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Assistant Secretary of Labor for Labor-Management Standards, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7120 . (Beatty memo., exh. A, p.”

Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, Local Union 1245 v. City of Gridley, 666 P.2d 960 (Cal. 1983). · cites it 2× “( 5 U.S.C. § 7120 (f); 5 U.S.C. § 7103 (a)(4).”

Local 1219, Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees v. Donovan, 683 F.2d 511 (D.C. Cir. 1982). · cites it 3× “The government argues that there is “no law to apply” in this case because the CSRA, 5 U.S.C. § 7120 (d), allows the Assistant Secretary of Labor Management Relations (“Assistant Secretary”) to provide remedies “as he considers appropriate.”

Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, Local 2513, Afl-Cio v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 834 F.2d 174 (D.C. Cir. 1987). · cites it 7× “The FLRA simply assumed the propriety of its finding that voting is “participation” pursuant to section 7120 and amounts to an unfair labor practice under sections 7116(a)(1), (3) and 7116(b)(8). Conversely, the AFGE maintains that section 7120 is not a tool which the FLRA may…”

Celli v. Shoell, 40 F.3d 324 (10th Cir. 1994). · cites it 2× “NO DIRECT RIGHT OF ACTION AGAINST UNIONS UNDER 5 U.S.C. § 7120 . The plaintiffs argue that because section 7120 of CSRA and section 411 of LMRDA both establish a bill of rights for union members and LMRDA section 412 explicitly allows direct suit against unions in district…”

Prof'l Air Traffic Controllers Org. v. Fed. Labor Relations Auth., 685 F.2d 547 (D.C. Cir. 1982). · cites it 6× “5 U.S.C. § 7120 (f) (Supp. IV 1980). In this case we review the first application of section 7120(f) by the FLRA.”

Brenda J. Reed v. John N. Sturdivant Am. Fed'n of Gov't Employees, 176 F.3d 1051 (8th Cir. 1999). · cites it 2× “” 5 U.S.C. §§ 7120 (e) and (d). While both Title III of the LMRDA and the CSRA regulate trusteeships, their respective remedial regimes are very different.”

Parker v. Main, 804 F. Supp. 284 (M.D. Ala. 1992). · cites it 2× “The CSRA, on the other hand, directs the Assistant Secretary of Labor to prescribe regulations governing standards of conduct for labor organizations, 5 U.S.C.A. § 7120 , and a member’s sole remedy for violations is to file a complaint with the Assistant Secretary under 5 U.”

Fed. Educ. Ass'n Stateside Region v. FLRA, 104 F.4th 275 (D.C. Cir. 2024). · cites it 2× “7 See 5 U.S.C. § 7120 . As Brewer recognized, the union’s decision to violate a labor contract “is not to be taken lightly” and reliance on a ULP proceeding as the exclusive method to obtain review of an FSIP order comes with significant drawbacks.”

Air Transp. Ass'n of Am. v. Prof'l Air Traffic Controllers Org., 667 F.2d 316 (2d Cir. 1981). “Ford). . For example, unlike 5 U.S.C. § 7311 or 18 U.”

Show all 17 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.