Not so much a slippery slope as one of the enduring tensions within the structure of the Federal Government as designed by the Constitution.
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 establishes Congressional authority "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
At the same time, Congress is enjoined in the First Amendment from passing any law that abridges "the right of the people peaceably to assemble". A strike and its related picket lines is nothing if not the epitome of peaceable assembly.
The Railway Labor Act (45 USC Chapter 8) has from its inception in 1926 sought to replace worker strikes with mediation and binding arbitration to resolve contract negotiations and other labor disputes.
The stated purpose of the legislation specifically highlights the goal of avoiding rail strikes, while at the same time preventing railroad lockouts and similar corporate means of pushing back against the strike threat.
"The purposes of the chapter are: (1) To avoid any interruption to commerce or to the operation of any carrier engaged therein; (2) to forbid any limitation upon freedom of association among employees or any denial, as a condition of employment or otherwise, of the right of employees to join a labor organization; (3) to provide for the complete independence of carriers and of employees in the matter of self-organization to carry out the purposes of this chapter; (4) to provide for the prompt and orderly settlement of all disputes concerning rates of pay, rules, or working conditions; (5) to provide for the prompt and orderly settlement of all disputes growing out of grievances or out of the interpretation or application of agreements covering rates of pay, rules, or working conditions."
While the Constitutionality of the law has been upheld on the basis that it does not violate the Article 1 Section 9 prohibition on passing bills of attainder and similar legislative punishments, its dueling mandates to ostensibly protect both worker rights and the rights of the railroads themselves mean that, in any reconciliation of Congressional authority versus workers' rights, workers rights are going to come up short, every time.
If they can legislate the rights of railroad workers, could they not legislate everyone's rights away? This seems a VERY slippery slope.
Not so much a slippery slope as one of the enduring tensions within the structure of the Federal Government as designed by the Constitution.
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 3 establishes Congressional authority "To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;"
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/full-text
At the same time, Congress is enjoined in the First Amendment from passing any law that abridges "the right of the people peaceably to assemble". A strike and its related picket lines is nothing if not the epitome of peaceable assembly.
The Railway Labor Act (45 USC Chapter 8) has from its inception in 1926 sought to replace worker strikes with mediation and binding arbitration to resolve contract negotiations and other labor disputes.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/45/chapter-8
The stated purpose of the legislation specifically highlights the goal of avoiding rail strikes, while at the same time preventing railroad lockouts and similar corporate means of pushing back against the strike threat.
"The purposes of the chapter are: (1) To avoid any interruption to commerce or to the operation of any carrier engaged therein; (2) to forbid any limitation upon freedom of association among employees or any denial, as a condition of employment or otherwise, of the right of employees to join a labor organization; (3) to provide for the complete independence of carriers and of employees in the matter of self-organization to carry out the purposes of this chapter; (4) to provide for the prompt and orderly settlement of all disputes concerning rates of pay, rules, or working conditions; (5) to provide for the prompt and orderly settlement of all disputes growing out of grievances or out of the interpretation or application of agreements covering rates of pay, rules, or working conditions."
While the Constitutionality of the law has been upheld on the basis that it does not violate the Article 1 Section 9 prohibition on passing bills of attainder and similar legislative punishments, its dueling mandates to ostensibly protect both worker rights and the rights of the railroads themselves mean that, in any reconciliation of Congressional authority versus workers' rights, workers rights are going to come up short, every time.
The last sentence. What we should try to avoid.