This Article provides a thorough examination of the fluid state of the law governing employee involvement committees. These employer-initiated committees offer a forum for management and labor to exchange ideas and proposals on a wide variety of topics, including issues ofprinciple concern to the employees-working conditions and rates of pay---as well as matter of principle concern to employers-operational efficiency and product development. Traditional interpretations of the prohibition on

more »

... any unions found in section 8(a)(2) of the Wagner Act fail to delineate clearly between permissible employer-employee brainstorming and impermissible company-dominated labor organizations. In two recent high-profile cases, the National Labor Relations Board found two employee involvement committees to be in violation of section 8(a)(2); however, Board members disagreed over the extent of the prohibition in that section. After examining these cases and the approach of several courts of appeal, Professor Cochran concludes that it is an oversimplification to conclude that merely because employee involvement committees do not infringe on employees' freedom to unionize, they do not violate 8(a)(2). Cochran contends that the structural approach to labor-management relations, as outlined in the Wagner Act, should not, and need not, be sacrificed to permit the establishment of employee involvement committees. Major reform of the law is not required to accomodate the goals sought by proponents of the employee involvement committees, because genuine employee participation is best achieved through dealing with independent employee organizations. By maintaining the current prohibition on company-dominated labor organizations, labor law will protect employees' right to speak with an autonomous voice, thus ensuring that employee participation will be authentic and beneficial.