36:
232:
175:, which declares that no person shall be deprived of liberty or property without due process of law. The court was careful, however, to restrict the decision to the provision relating to discharge, and to express no opinion as to the remainder of the law. The section of the Erdman Act making it criminal to force employees to sign anti-union agreements therefore remained unadjudicated.
138:
called an "iron clad document," and from this time until the close of the 19th century "iron-clad" was the customary name for the non-union promise. Beginning with New York in 1887, sixteen states wrote on their statute books declarations making it a criminal act to force employees to agree not to join unions. The
Congress of the United States incorporated in the
145:
During the last decade of the 19th century and the opening years of the 20th, the individual, anti-union promise declined in importance as an instrument in labor warfare. Its novelty had worn off; workers no longer felt themselves morally bound to live up to it and union organizers, of course, wholly
146:
disregarded it. In the early 20th century, the individual, anti-union promise was resorted to frequently in coal mining and in the metal trades. And it was not membership in a union that was usually prohibited, but participation in those essential activities without which membership is valueless.
137:
In the 1870s, a written agreement containing a pledge not to join a union was commonly referred to as the "Infamous
Document". This strengthens the belief that American employers in their resort to individual contracts were consciously following English precedents. This anti-union pledge was also
189:: "This agreement has been well named. It is yellow dog for sure. It reduces to the level of a yellow dog any man that signs it, for he signs away every right he possesses under the Constitution and laws of the land and makes himself the truckling, helpless slave of the employer."
192:
Even though they were forbidden in the private sector by the Norris–LaGuardia Act in 1932, yellow dog contracts were allowed in public sector, including many government jobs, such as teachers, until the 1960s, beginning with precedent established in 1915 with
149:
In 1910, the
International United Brotherhood of Leather Workers on Horse Goods, following an unsuccessful conference with the National Saddlery Manufacturers' Association, called a national strike in the saddlery industry for the
182:
started appearing in the spring of 1921, in leading articles and editorials devoted to the subject which appeared in the labor press. Typical was the comment of the editor of the
154:. The strike proved a failure, and a large number of employers required oral or written promises to abandon and remain out of the organization as a condition of re-employment.
171:
relating to discharge, because it would compel an employer to accept or retain the personal services of another person against the employer's will, was a violation of the
538:
172:
46:
113:. In the United States, such contracts were used by employers to prevent the formation of unions, most often by permitting employers to take
208:. It traced their history from the 1830s in the United Kingdom, the 1870s in the United States, the use of the term "yellow dog" following
109:) is an agreement between an employer and an employee in which the employee agrees, as a condition of employment, not to be a member of a
308:
17:
523:
164:
80:
543:
533:
184:
58:
217:
326:
122:
62:
237:
159:
528:
54:
126:
8:
385:
251:
463:
496:
492:
413:
409:
348:
201:
118:
309:"Doctrinal Synergies and Liberal Dilemmas: The Case of the Yellow-Dog Contract"
213:
151:
517:
212:, to a land-mark event when the U.S. Senate rejected the nomination of Judge
438:
Public
Workers: Government Employee Unions, the Law and the State, 1900–1962
257:
209:
142:
of 1898 a provision relating to carriers engaged in interstate commerce.
110:
282:
262:
168:
139:
114:
467:
102:
451:
27:
Work contract where an employee agrees to not join a trade union
231:
245:
372:, (Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1957), pp. 238–239
227:
132:
349:"Coercion, Contract and the Limits of the Market"
515:
386:"yellow-dog contract | Definition & History"
539:History of labor relations in the United States
43:The examples and perspective in this article
167:'s majority held that the provision of the
452:"The Yellow Dog Contract. Joel I. Seidman"
81:Learn how and when to remove this message
204:wrote the first-ever book on the topic,
498:The Yellow Dog Contract: A Dissertation
491:
415:The Yellow Dog Contract: A Dissertation
408:
14:
516:
370:The Crisis of the Old Order, 1919–1933
246:Christian Labour Association of Canada
121:. In 1932, yellow-dog contracts were
462:(4). University of Chicago: 703–704.
449:
418:. Johns Hopkins Press. pp. 11–38
380:
378:
346:
29:
327:"Yellow Dog Contract - RunSensible"
173:Fifth Amendment to the Constitution
24:
485:
25:
555:
501:. Johns Hopkins Press. p. 96
450:Witte, Edwin E. (December 1933).
375:
230:
133:Origin of term and brief history
34:
289:. Independence Hall Association
125:in the United States under the
443:
440:. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press, 2004.
430:
402:
362:
347:Basu, Kaushik (January 2006).
340:
319:
301:
275:
13:
1:
268:
7:
283:"37b. Labor vs. Management"
223:
218:United States Supreme Court
165:United States Supreme Court
57:, discuss the issue on the
10:
560:
524:1932 in the United States
368:Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.,
356:CAE Working Paper #06-01
544:United States labor law
390:Encyclopedia Britannica
238:Organized labour portal
206:The Yellow Dog Contract
160:Adair v. United States
534:History of labour law
456:Social Service Review
313:Notre Dame Law School
127:Norris-LaGuardia Act
63:create a new article
55:improve this article
45:may not represent a
18:Yellow dog contracts
185:United Mine Workers
105:, also known as an
95:yellow-dog contract
436:Slater, Joseph E.
195:Frederick v. Owens
252:Coppage v. Kansas
99:yellow-dog clause
91:
90:
83:
65:, as appropriate.
16:(Redirected from
551:
510:
508:
506:
493:Seidman, Joel I.
479:
478:
476:
474:
447:
441:
434:
428:
427:
425:
423:
410:Seidman, Joel I.
406:
400:
399:
397:
396:
382:
373:
366:
360:
359:
353:
344:
338:
337:
335:
334:
323:
317:
316:
305:
299:
298:
296:
294:
279:
240:
235:
234:
119:union organizers
86:
79:
75:
72:
66:
38:
37:
30:
21:
559:
558:
554:
553:
552:
550:
549:
548:
514:
513:
504:
502:
488:
486:Further reading
483:
482:
472:
470:
448:
444:
435:
431:
421:
419:
407:
403:
394:
392:
384:
383:
376:
367:
363:
351:
345:
341:
332:
330:
325:
324:
320:
307:
306:
302:
292:
290:
281:
280:
276:
271:
236:
229:
226:
202:Joel I. Seidman
135:
87:
76:
70:
67:
52:
39:
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
557:
547:
546:
541:
536:
531:
526:
512:
511:
487:
484:
481:
480:
468:10.1086/631332
442:
429:
401:
374:
361:
339:
318:
300:
273:
272:
270:
267:
266:
265:
260:
255:
248:
242:
241:
225:
222:
214:John J. Parker
134:
131:
89:
88:
49:of the subject
47:worldwide view
42:
40:
33:
26:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
556:
545:
542:
540:
537:
535:
532:
530:
527:
525:
522:
521:
519:
500:
499:
494:
490:
489:
469:
465:
461:
457:
453:
446:
439:
433:
417:
416:
411:
405:
391:
387:
381:
379:
371:
365:
357:
350:
343:
328:
322:
314:
310:
304:
288:
284:
278:
274:
264:
261:
259:
256:
254:
253:
249:
247:
244:
243:
239:
233:
228:
221:
219:
215:
211:
207:
203:
198:
196:
190:
188:
186:
181:
176:
174:
170:
166:
162:
161:
155:
153:
147:
143:
141:
130:
128:
124:
120:
116:
112:
108:
107:ironclad oath
104:
100:
96:
85:
82:
74:
64:
60:
56:
50:
48:
41:
32:
31:
19:
529:Contract law
503:. Retrieved
497:
471:. Retrieved
459:
455:
445:
437:
432:
420:. Retrieved
414:
404:
393:. Retrieved
389:
369:
364:
355:
342:
331:. Retrieved
329:. 2023-11-07
321:
312:
303:
291:. Retrieved
287:U.S. History
286:
277:
258:Labor rights
250:
205:
199:
194:
191:
183:
179:
177:
158:
157:In the case
156:
148:
144:
136:
115:legal action
106:
98:
94:
92:
77:
68:
44:
210:World War I
111:labor union
518:Categories
395:2021-08-30
333:2024-07-17
293:11 October
269:References
263:Labour law
180:yellow dog
169:Erdman Act
152:8-hour day
140:Erdman Act
200:In 1932,
187:' Journal
178:The term
71:July 2016
59:talk page
495:(1932).
412:(1932).
224:See also
123:outlawed
117:against
103:contract
53:You may
216:to the
505:26 May
473:26 May
422:26 May
163:, the
352:(PDF)
101:of a
61:, or
507:2022
475:2022
424:2022
295:2021
464:doi
97:(a
520::
458:.
454:.
388:.
377:^
354:.
311:.
285:.
220:.
197:.
129:.
93:A
509:.
477:.
466::
460:7
426:.
398:.
358:.
336:.
315:.
297:.
84:)
78:(
73:)
69:(
51:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
