25:
221:
164:, 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.
127:
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
134:
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
135:
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.
126:
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
178:: "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."
181:
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
138:
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
171:
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
143:. 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.
160:
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
527:
161:
35:
102:. In the United States, such contracts were used by employers to prevent the formation of unions, most often by permitting employers to take
197:. 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
98:) 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
297:
512:
153:
69:
532:
522:
173:
47:
206:
315:
111:
51:
226:
148:
517:
43:
115:
8:
374:
240:
452:
485:
481:
402:
398:
337:
190:
107:
298:"Doctrinal Synergies and Liberal Dilemmas: The Case of the Yellow-Dog Contract"
202:
140:
506:
201:, to a land-mark event when the U.S. Senate rejected the nomination of Judge
427:
Public
Workers: Government Employee Unions, the Law and the State, 1900–1962
246:
198:
131:
of 1898 a provision relating to carriers engaged in interstate commerce.
99:
271:
251:
157:
128:
103:
456:
91:
440:
16:
Work contract where an employee agrees to not join a trade union
220:
234:
361:, (Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston, 1957), pp. 238–239
216:
121:
338:"Coercion, Contract and the Limits of the Market"
504:
375:"yellow-dog contract | Definition & History"
528:History of labor relations in the United States
32:The examples and perspective in this article
156:'s majority held that the provision of the
441:"The Yellow Dog Contract. Joel I. Seidman"
70:Learn how and when to remove this message
193:wrote the first-ever book on the topic,
487:The Yellow Dog Contract: A Dissertation
480:
404:The Yellow Dog Contract: A Dissertation
397:
505:
359:The Crisis of the Old Order, 1919–1933
235:Christian Labour Association of Canada
110:. In 1932, yellow-dog contracts were
451:(4). University of Chicago: 703–704.
438:
407:. Johns Hopkins Press. pp. 11–38
369:
367:
335:
18:
316:"Yellow Dog Contract - RunSensible"
162:Fifth Amendment to the Constitution
13:
474:
14:
544:
490:. Johns Hopkins Press. p. 96
439:Witte, Edwin E. (December 1933).
364:
219:
122:Origin of term and brief history
23:
278:. Independence Hall Association
114:in the United States under the
432:
429:. Ithaca, NY: ILR Press, 2004.
419:
391:
351:
336:Basu, Kaushik (January 2006).
329:
308:
290:
264:
1:
257:
7:
272:"37b. Labor vs. Management"
212:
207:United States Supreme Court
154:United States Supreme Court
46:, discuss the issue on the
10:
549:
513:1932 in the United States
357:Arthur Schlesinger, Jr.,
345:CAE Working Paper #06-01
533:United States labor law
379:Encyclopedia Britannica
227:Organized labour portal
195:The Yellow Dog Contract
149:Adair v. United States
523:History of labour law
445:Social Service Review
302:Notre Dame Law School
116:Norris-LaGuardia Act
52:create a new article
44:improve this article
34:may not represent a
174:United Mine Workers
94:, also known as an
84:yellow-dog contract
425:Slater, Joseph E.
184:Frederick v. Owens
241:Coppage v. Kansas
88:yellow-dog clause
80:
79:
72:
54:, as appropriate.
540:
499:
497:
495:
482:Seidman, Joel I.
468:
467:
465:
463:
436:
430:
423:
417:
416:
414:
412:
399:Seidman, Joel I.
395:
389:
388:
386:
385:
371:
362:
355:
349:
348:
342:
333:
327:
326:
324:
323:
312:
306:
305:
294:
288:
287:
285:
283:
268:
229:
224:
223:
108:union organizers
75:
68:
64:
61:
55:
27:
26:
19:
548:
547:
543:
542:
541:
539:
538:
537:
503:
502:
493:
491:
477:
475:Further reading
472:
471:
461:
459:
437:
433:
424:
420:
410:
408:
396:
392:
383:
381:
373:
372:
365:
356:
352:
340:
334:
330:
321:
319:
314:
313:
309:
296:
295:
291:
281:
279:
270:
269:
265:
260:
225:
218:
215:
191:Joel I. Seidman
124:
76:
65:
59:
56:
41:
28:
24:
17:
12:
11:
5:
546:
536:
535:
530:
525:
520:
515:
501:
500:
476:
473:
470:
469:
457:10.1086/631332
431:
418:
390:
363:
350:
328:
307:
289:
262:
261:
259:
256:
255:
254:
249:
244:
237:
231:
230:
214:
211:
203:John J. Parker
123:
120:
78:
77:
38:of the subject
36:worldwide view
31:
29:
22:
15:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
545:
534:
531:
529:
526:
524:
521:
519:
516:
514:
511:
510:
508:
489:
488:
483:
479:
478:
458:
454:
450:
446:
442:
435:
428:
422:
406:
405:
400:
394:
380:
376:
370:
368:
360:
354:
346:
339:
332:
317:
311:
303:
299:
293:
277:
273:
267:
263:
253:
250:
248:
245:
243:
242:
238:
236:
233:
232:
228:
222:
217:
210:
208:
204:
200:
196:
192:
187:
185:
179:
177:
175:
170:
165:
163:
159:
155:
151:
150:
144:
142:
136:
132:
130:
119:
117:
113:
109:
105:
101:
97:
96:ironclad oath
93:
89:
85:
74:
71:
63:
53:
49:
45:
39:
37:
30:
21:
20:
518:Contract law
492:. Retrieved
486:
460:. Retrieved
448:
444:
434:
426:
421:
409:. Retrieved
403:
393:
382:. Retrieved
378:
358:
353:
344:
331:
320:. Retrieved
318:. 2023-11-07
310:
301:
292:
280:. Retrieved
276:U.S. History
275:
266:
247:Labor rights
239:
194:
188:
183:
180:
172:
168:
166:
147:
146:In the case
145:
137:
133:
125:
104:legal action
95:
87:
83:
81:
66:
57:
33:
199:World War I
100:labor union
507:Categories
384:2021-08-30
322:2024-07-17
282:11 October
258:References
252:Labour law
169:yellow dog
158:Erdman Act
141:8-hour day
129:Erdman Act
189:In 1932,
176:' Journal
167:The term
60:July 2016
48:talk page
484:(1932).
401:(1932).
213:See also
112:outlawed
106:against
92:contract
42:You may
205:to the
494:26 May
462:26 May
411:26 May
152:, the
341:(PDF)
90:of a
50:, or
496:2022
464:2022
413:2022
284:2021
453:doi
86:(a
509::
447:.
443:.
377:.
366:^
343:.
300:.
274:.
209:.
186:.
118:.
82:A
498:.
466:.
455::
449:7
415:.
387:.
347:.
325:.
304:.
286:.
73:)
67:(
62:)
58:(
40:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
