Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-mwx4w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T16:13:52.427Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Into the Twilight Zone—The Law and the American Industrial Relations System since the New Deal

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 December 2008

Ronald W. Schatz
Ronald W. Schatz
Affiliation:
Wesleyan University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Review Essays
Information
International Labor and Working-Class History , Volume 36 , Fall 1989 , pp. 51 - 60
Copyright
Copyright © International Labor and Working-Class History, Inc. 1989

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1. Klare, Karl E., “Judicial Deradicalization of the Wagner Act and the Origins of Modern Legal Consciousness, 1937–1941,” Minnesota Law Review 62 (1978): 265–339Google Scholar; Klare, Karl E., “Labor Law as Ideology: Toward a New Historiography of Collective Bargaining Law,” Industrial Relations Law Journal 4 (1981): 450–82Google Scholar; Klare, Karl E., “Critical Theory and Labor Relations Law,” in The Politics of Law: A Progressive Critique, ed. Kairys, David (New York, 1982)Google Scholar; Lynd, Staughton, “Government without Rights: The Labor Law Vision of Archibald Cox,” Industrial Relations Law Journal 4 (1981): 483–95.Google Scholar

2. Bernstein, Irving, Turbulent Years: A History of the American Worker 1933–1941 (Boston, 1969), ch. 13Google Scholar; and Gregory, Charles O., Labor and the Law, 2d ed. (New York, 1958), 224.Google Scholar A great exception in this regard is Selig Perlman, who, while fully acknowledging that “the New Deal effected a veritable revolution in American government, comparable to the Jeffersonian and Jacksonian revolutions,” wished that it had not taken place. There are considerable similarities between Perlman's attitude and analysis and that of Christopher Tomlins. See Perlman's, “Labor and the New Deal in Historical Perspective,” in Labor and the New Deal, ed. Derber, Milton and Young, Edwin (Madison, 1957), 361–70.Google Scholar

3. National Labor Relations Board v. Mackay Radio & Telegraph Company, 304 U.S., 333–51.Google Scholar

4. Ibid., 346–47, 351.

5. Cox, Archibald and Dunlop, John T., “Regulation of Collective Bargaining by the National Relations Board,” Harvard Law Review 63 (01 1950), 395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

6. McDonald, David J., Union Man (New York, 1969), 80–82, 87, 134–35.Google Scholar

7. Consolidated Edison Company Inc., et al. v. NLRB (1938), 305 US.Google Scholar

8. Casebeer, Kenneth M., “Holder of the Pen: An Interview with Leon Keyserling on Drafting the Wagner Act,” University of Miami Law Review 42 (11 1987): 300–301, 309, 313, 316–20ff.Google Scholar

9. Dunlop, John T., “Consensus and National Labor Policy,” in Proceedings of the Thirteenth Annual Meeting, Industrial Relations Research Association, ed. Somers, Gerald G. et al. , (1961), 15.Google Scholar

10. On this point see my “From Commons to Dunlop and Kerr: Rethinking the Field and Practice of Industrial Relations,” in Industrial Democracy: Work Relations in 20th-century AmericaGoogle Scholar, ed. Harris, Howell John and Lichtenstein, Nelson (Cambridge, Mass., forthcoming).Google Scholar