30 likes | 166 Views
Brown v. Pro Football, Inc. fundamental inconsistency between anti-trust law and labor law anti-trust law based on individual behavior in the market; generally condemns economic actors acting jointly collective bargaining based on the protection of some joint activity in the labor market
E N D
Brown v. Pro Football, Inc. • fundamental inconsistency between anti-trust law and labor law • anti-trust law based on individual behavior in the market; generally condemns economic actors acting jointly • collective bargaining based on the protection of some joint activity in the labor market • labor law could not function if it was subject to anti-trust laws • Congressional preference to limit judicial use of anti-trust laws in labor disputes
Brown v. Pro Football, Inc.(cont.) • Bargaining could not take place if subject to antitrust laws and legal restrictions on restraint of trade • A-T exemption applies to agreement among employers to legally implement final preimpasse proposal at impasse • as no violation of labor law, antitrust exemption applies. • No reason to treat multiemployer bargaining differently than single employer bargaining. • Multi er bargaining well established
Brown v. Pro Football, Inc.(cont.) • Antitrust exemption should not be limited only to collective bargaining agreements • agreement may never be reached, but bargaining process must continue • Unwilling to permit antitrust liability at impasse - • impasse an integral part of the structure of labor law and labor relations regulation • Anti-trust exemption applies to entire CB process, not simply a CB agreement