We are upgrading the repository! A content freeze is in effect until November 22nd, 2024 - no new submissions will be accepted; however, all content already published will remain publicly available. Please reach out to repository@u.library.arizona.edu with your questions, or if you are a UA affiliate who needs to make content available soon. Note that any new user accounts created after September 22, 2024 will need to be recreated by the user in November after our migration is completed.

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorMcCarthy, Jack
dc.date.accessioned2024-06-10T18:34:05Z
dc.date.available2024-06-10T18:34:05Z
dc.date.issued2024
dc.identifier.citation41 Ariz. J. Int'l & Comp. L. 108 (2024)en_US
dc.identifier.issn0743-6963
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/672709
dc.descriptionNoteen_US
dc.description.abstractThe Taft-Hartley Act of 1947 removed some of labor’s most effective tools for collective bargaining without providing any alternatives. Among other tools, the Act made secondary boycotts illegal and allowed employers to recover damages caused by secondary boycotts. This Note will show how effective these secondary boycotts can be internationally and discuss how the lack of clarity in the American law prevents workers from engaging in constitutionally protected speech. Many argue that the current law is in place to prevent industrial strife from affecting third-party employers. The current law, however, places too powerful of a thumb on the scale in favor of management and effectively chills labor organizations’ speech out of fear of a lawsuit over one misstep. This Note explores how Denmark regulates secondary boycotts in an effort to provide an alternative way of thinking about this powerful tool of labor and considers potential next steps to improve existing American law.en_US
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law (Tucson, AZ)
dc.relation.urlhttp://arizonajournal.org
dc.relation.urlhttp://arizonajournal.org
dc.rightsCopyright © The Author(s)
dc.rights.urihttp://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/
dc.titleWinning is Secondary: Secondary Boycotts in the United States and Denmark [Note]en_US
dc.typeArticle
dc.typetext
dc.identifier.journalArizona Journal of International and Comparative Law
dc.description.collectioninformationThis material published in Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law is made available by the James E. Rogers College of Law, the Daniel F. Cracchiolo Law Library, and the University of Arizona Libraries. If you have questions, please contact the AJICL Editorial Board at http://arizonajournal.org/contact-us/.
dc.source.journaltitleArizona Journal of International and Comparative Law
dc.source.volume41
dc.source.issue1
refterms.dateFOA2024-06-10T18:34:06Z


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Name:
AJICL_41(1)_Winning_is_Seconda ...
Size:
457.7Kb
Format:
PDF

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record