184 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10270759)
1. Are worker participation plans "labor organizations" within the meaning of Section 2(5)?: a proposed framework of analysis.
Beaver MS
Labor Law J; 1985 Apr; 36(4):226-37. PubMed ID: 10270759
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
2. Worker participation and the law: two views and comment.
Alexander KO
Labor Law J; 1985 Jul; 36(7):428-33. PubMed ID: 10272444
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
3. Quality circles and labor relation issues.
Flarey DL
Nurs Econ; 1989; 7(5):266-9, 280. PubMed ID: 2812070
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. The Fair Labor Standards Act: a potential legal constraint upon quality circles and other employee participation programs.
Richmond WL; Reynolds DL
Labor Law J; 1986 Apr; 37(4):244-9. PubMed ID: 10276869
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
5. Employee participation programs in the health care industry: are they unlawful under recent labor rulings?
Robinson RK; Fink RL; Fink LA
Hosp Health Serv Adm; 1995; 40(1):124-37. PubMed ID: 10140869
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Employee participation programs after electromation: they're worth the risk!
Stickler KB; Mehler PL
Ann Health Law; 1993; 2():55-66. PubMed ID: 10139968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. The National Labor Relations Act: a potential legal constraint upon quality circles and other employer-sponsored employee committees.
Behrens CK; Sollenberger JR
Labor Law J; 1983 Dec; 34(12):776-80. PubMed ID: 10265365
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
8. Employee participation committees: a union in sheep's clothing?
Stephens D
Health Care Law Newsl; 1993 Sep; 8(9):7-12. PubMed ID: 10128380
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
9. Quality circles, human service organizations, and the law.
McNeely RL; Schultz B; Naatz F
Adm Soc Work; 1997; 21(1):65-71. PubMed ID: 10166760
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
10. Getting maximum value from employee teams--and keeping them legal.
McConnell CR
Health Care Superv; 1994 Sep; 13(1):66-73. PubMed ID: 10136987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. An 'enlightened' view of employee committees under the Taft-Hartley Act.
Klaper MJ
Employee Relat Law J; 1983-1984 Winter; 9(3):474-84. PubMed ID: 10265039
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. What hospitals have to fear from labor law reform.
Hosp Prog; 1978 Sep; 59(9):8, 12. PubMed ID: 680685
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
13. Federal regulations of labor-management relations.
Davis CD
Tex Hosp; 1980 Aug; 36(3):40-1. PubMed ID: 10248196
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
14. 1983-1984 Supreme Court term promises significant labor decisions.
Peterson RN
Health Law Vigil; 1983 Oct; 6(21):20-3. PubMed ID: 10317377
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
15. The National Labor Relations Act and employment-at-will: the federal preemption docrine revisited.
Zimmerman DA; Howard-Martin J
Labor Law J; 1986 Apr; 37(4):223-34. PubMed ID: 10276868
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
16. The Supreme Court, 1978-79--labor relations and employment discrimination.
Modjeska L
Cornell Law Rev; 1979 Nov; 65(1):57-74. PubMed ID: 10245115
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
17. Legal obstacles to alternative work-force designs.
Fasman ZD
Employee Relat Law J; 1982; 8(2):256-81. PubMed ID: 10257048
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Paving the way for quality control circles.
Albertina MJ
Adm Radiol; 1988 Jun; 7(6):14-9. PubMed ID: 10288101
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
19. NLRB ruling raises concerns on committees.
Burda D
Mod Healthc; 1993 Jan; 23(3):35. PubMed ID: 10123659
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
20. A question of authority.
Vaccaro PL; Bryant MR
Provider; 1994 Feb; 20(2):39-40. PubMed ID: 10132004
[No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
