<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Law updates and Latest Law Updates, music law,Internet Law,Anti Narcotic law,Black Water,Sexual Harassment Law &#187; labor-laws</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/category/labor-laws/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Apr 2010 06:37:20 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Killing the Working American</title>
		<link>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/killing-the-working-american/</link>
		<comments>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/killing-the-working-american/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 06:19:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[labor-laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/?p=129</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Legislatively, rebuilding labor will require at long last the repeal of the most repressive anti-labor law ever to visit the halls of congress: The Taft-Hartley Labor Act of 1945. An amendment to the National Labor Relations Act, it extended the concept of â€œunfair labor practices&#8221; to labor itself. It prohibited wildcat, jurisdictional, political and solidarity [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span>Legislatively, rebuilding labor will require at long last the repeal of the most repressive anti-labor law ever to visit the halls of congress: The Taft-Hartley Labor Act of 1945. An amendment to the National Labor Relations Act, it extended the concept of â€œunfair labor practices&#8221; to labor itself. It prohibited wildcat, jurisdictional, political and solidarity strikes. </span></span></p>
<p><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-323" title="employment_law_training_1" src="http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/employment_law_training_1-300x199.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="199" /></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span>It banned secondary boycotts, closed shops and secondary picketing. It enabled states to pass â€œright to work&#8221; laws [2] effectively prohibiting the right to organize. It enabled the federal government to break strikes by injunction, which Ronald Reagan famously employed to break the air traffic controllers strike in the 1970&#8217;s. All of these prohibitions tear at the fundamental rights to organize the workforce and effectively represent their interests. None have a place in a modern democracy.</span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/killing-the-working-american/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Workers Express High Approval for Unions</title>
		<link>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/workers-express-high-approval-for-unions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/workers-express-high-approval-for-unions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 06:18:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[labor-laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/?p=127</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That same survey also found that almost eight in 10 Americans support stronger laws to give employers more incentive to obey labor laws. Seven in 10 workers favor passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, which would impose stiffer penalties on anti-union employers, reduce federal red tape, and give workers a greater choice about unionization [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span>That same survey also found that almost eight in 10 Americans support stronger laws to give employers more incentive to obey labor laws. Seven in 10 workers favor passage of the Employee Free Choice Act, which would impose stiffer penalties on anti-union employers, reduce federal red tape, and give workers a greater choice about unionization in their workplace.</span></span></p>
<p><a href="http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/51artyih1dl_ss500_.jpg"><img class="alignnone size-medium wp-image-326" title="51artyih1dl_ss500_" src="http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/51artyih1dl_ss500_-300x300.jpg" alt="" width="300" height="300" /></a></p>
<p>The labor movement played a huge role in sending Barack Obama to the White House, both in terms of its dollars and staffing power in key battleground states like Michigan, Indiana and Pennsylvania.</p>
<p>Labor backed Obama because of his support for key issues on their agenda: an economic stimulus package that prioritizes the needs of working families and homeowners, new union protections embodied in the Employee Free Choice Act, anti-discrimination measures such as the Fair Pay Act (for women workers) and the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (for LGBT workers), rethinking international trade agreements to include strong worker and environmental protections, a universal health care system, and retirement security.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/workers-express-high-approval-for-unions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Republic workers win victory for entire labor movement</title>
		<link>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/republic-workers-win-victory-for-entire-labor-movement/</link>
		<comments>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/republic-workers-win-victory-for-entire-labor-movement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 06:17:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[labor-laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/?p=125</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Federal labor laws require 60 daysï¿½ notice in case of plant closings and large layoffs. Republic owners said it needed to shut down the factory because their main credit lender Bank of America had cut off itï¿½s expected financing. Bank of America recently received a $25 billion bailout package from the federal government but decided [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span>Federal labor laws require 60 daysï¿½ notice in case of plant closings and large layoffs. Republic owners said it needed to shut down the factory because their main credit lender Bank of America had cut off itï¿½s expected financing. Bank of America recently received a $25 billion bailout package from the federal government but decided it wouldnï¿½t go to keep manufacturing operations running.</span></span></p>
<p>Anger grew among the workers after they found out that Republic owners formed a new company and bought a new plant in Iowa, where apparently labor costs are less expensive. Meanwhile the workers vowed to fight and they occupied the Chicago factory until they were granted assurances they would receive the money owed to them.</p>
<p>Finally after three days and close to 20 hours of negotiations a deal was made.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/republic-workers-win-victory-for-entire-labor-movement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Wal-Mart Wage and Hour Lawsuit in Minnesota to Settle for $54 Million</title>
		<link>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/wal-mart-wage-and-hour-lawsuit-in-minnesota-to-settle-for-54-million/</link>
		<comments>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/wal-mart-wage-and-hour-lawsuit-in-minnesota-to-settle-for-54-million/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Dec 2008 06:17:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[labor-laws]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/?p=123</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The settlement was reached after Dakota County Judge Robert King Jr. ruled this summer that Wal-Mart had broken the state&#8217;s wage-and-hour labor laws over 2 million times, requiring the discount retailer to pay compensation to about 100,000 current and former employees who worked at any Wal-Mart or Sam&#8217;s Club store in Minnesota. 
 
 Employees [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span>The settlement was reached after Dakota County Judge Robert King Jr. ruled this summer that Wal-Mart had broken the state&#8217;s wage-and-hour labor laws over 2 million times, requiring the discount retailer to pay compensation to about 100,000 current and former employees who worked at any Wal-Mart or Sam&#8217;s Club store in Minnesota. </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span> </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span> Employees who worked for the company between September 11, 1998 and November 14, 2008 are covered by the settlement. </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span> </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span> The Walmart wage and hour class action lawsuit alleged that hourly employees were required to work off-the-clock during training sessions and that they were denied full rest and meal breaks as required by labor laws. </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span> </span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-family: Trebuchet MS;"><span> According to Bloomberg News, Wal-Mart has faced at least 70 similar wage law lawsuits involving similar accusations of unpaid work, rest breaks and meal breaks.</span></span></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.onlylawsite.com/lawupdates/2008/12/wal-mart-wage-and-hour-lawsuit-in-minnesota-to-settle-for-54-million/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
