Labor Law?????

Q: What is the name of the labor law that an employer must abide by when verbably reprimanding/threating to fire an employee without a witness?

A: I don't see how any law could apply without a witness, but check this out. (*) The Wagner Act By far the most important labor legislation of the 1930s was the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) of 1935, more popularly known as the Wagner Act, after its sponsor, Sen. Robert F. Wagner (NY-D). This law included reenactment of the previously invalidated labor sections of the NRA as well as a number of additions. The NLRA was applicable to all firms and employees in activities affecting interstate commerce with the exception of agricultural laborers, government employees, and those persons subject to the Railway Labor Act. It guaranteed covered workers the right to organize and join labor movements, to choose representatives and bargain collectively, and to strike. The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB), originally consisting of three members appointed by the President, was established by the Act as an independent Federal agency. The NLRB was given power to determine whether a union should be certified to represent particular groups of employees, using such methods as it deemed suitable to reach such a determination, including the holding of a representation election among workers concerned. Employers were forbidden by the Act from engaging in any of the five categories of unfair labor practices. Violation of this prohibition could result in the filing of a complaint with the NLRB by a union or employees. After investigation, the NLRB could order the cessation of such practices, reinstatement of a person fired for union activities, the provision of back pay, restoration of seniority, benefits, etc. An NLRB order issued in response to an unfair labor practice complaint was made enforceable by the Federal courts. Among those unfair labor practices forbidden by the Act were: 1 ) Dominating or otherwise interfering with formation of a labor union, including the provision of any financial or other support. 2) Interfering with or restraining employees engaged in the exercise of their rights to organize and bargain collectively. 3) Imposing

any special conditions of employment which tended either to encourage or discourage union membership. The law stated, however, that this provision should be construed to prohibit union contracts requiring union membership as a condition of employment in a company -- a provision which, in effect, permitted the closed and union shops. (In the former, only pre-existing members of the union could be hired, in the latter. new employees were required to join the union.) 4) Discharging or discriminating against an employee because he had given testimony or filed charges under the Act. 5) Refusing to bargain collectively with unions representing a company's employees.