The Sherman Antitrust Act

This result comes from the behavior of companies in the market which act as monopsonists (single buyers) as well as monopolies (single sellers). Single buyers are able to drive down the salute of the inputs that they purchase ( tote, in this instance) and thus put downward squash on wages even when these wages are paying to independent contractors. When contractors are unable to form corporate dicker units due to antitrust impact, they are, accord to Pleasure, unfairly penalized in violation of the intent of antitrust goals (Pleasure, 2000, p. 561).

Pleasure presents his argument through a review of belles-lettres including relevant mash cases (Brown v. ProFootball) and analysis of mingled legislation (including the Sherman and Clayton bes). By providing the historical background, Pleasure seeks to discern the existent intent of the Sherman put to work, and suggests that union organizers at that time recognized that the Sherman Act was being manipulated to attack union organization although that was not its intent, according to Pleasure.

Scholars are likely to interpret Pleasure's historical context interest and may use it as the basis for investigating whether his claims that fag out has been unfairly targeted by antitrust actions. More significantly, managers may grapple Pleasure's research as a warning that continuing to tide over anti-union efforts among independent contractors may attract additional legal challenges by unions who read Pleasure's w

Forbath, William E. Law and the organization of American Labor Movement. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1991.

For the foregoing reasons, the notion of repeal of the " persistence claim" has slight support, both in academic literature and in public policy debate. Most notably, it is popular among those who find inspiration in the so-called Austrian school of economics represented in the work of Friedrich August Von Hayek. See, for example, Baird's writings cited in my References. Baird's views on the exemption are reflected in the Heritage Foundation's Issues `96: The Candidate's Briefing Book, which calls for repeal of the Norris-LaGuardia Act "to remove union particular(a) privileges.

" Baird is listed as one of the five experts who contributed to the Briefing Book segment on Labor, Employment, and Wages.

Does the theme of special privilege reflect an grey-haired resentment that predates the recent very active management set of seeking shelter under the so-called labor exemption? Or is "privilege" a notion that simply fails to answer for for the labor-management character of the exemption, which received a great deal of assistance in 1996 after the court's decision in Brown v. ProFootball, Inc.? In any case, if one credits Justice Stone's opinion for the court in Apex Hosiery, the so-called exemption predates the Sherman Act itself, in that common law antitrust prohibitions did not run to labor matters in the first place. Surely, there is little support to harbour antitrust prohibitions to their lawful collective bargaining activities. The fact system that the exemption is available in the U.S. to all participants in the collective bargaining process.

What unions had not predicted at the time of the enactment of the Sherman Act was the the vehemence of the attack on union activity by the courts using the very legislation that unions had supported to limit the business office of the trusts; nor had the unions counted on the judicial activism of the courts in creating new anti
Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.