미국 연방노동관계법(NLRA)하에서 단체협약 법적성격론과 연방대법원 판례의 해석

Historically labor union, as a voluntary association, has been made up of members in good standing in America. Then the labor union, representing its members, demanded the higher wages and the better conditions of employment against a employer or employers. Since the late 18th century, labor union and employers have entered into written agreement to decided wages, rate of pay, hours and other employment conditions for employees in a workplace. But many contract scholars and lawyers doubted whether such a written agreements could be legally enforceable. Some legal literatures and jurisdictions declared that employers have no legal reasons to undertake obligations raising from the agreement not only against labor union, the party to agreement but also against one's own employees. On the other hands, some scholars of contract law tried to explain the legal character of the written agreement for labor union, employer and employees. Such debates in the legal profession and academics have suffered some changes because of National Labor Relations Act of 1935 and Labor Management Relations Act of 1947. The acts make the duty of collective bargaining by statutes with voluntary bargaining between labor union and employers. Furthermore, The act of 1947 has established the section 301 prescribing the enforceability of collective bargaining agreement in federal courts. Most of all, it is important that the Supreme Court could actively intervene in the disputes raising from collective bargaining agreement proceeding on the section 301. The Supreme Court's cases, like Lincoln Mills of 1957, steelworker's trilogy of 1960 are the legal basis for the law of collective bargaining agreement in America. The law of collective bargaining agreement premises that the agreement has legal effect on employees as well as the parties to agreement.