Hastings Law Journal Volume 30 | Issue 3 Article 10 1-1979 Discarding the Doctrine of Supervisory Domination: New Solutions to an Old Conflict of Interest Lynn Cox Peter Martin Nelson Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Lynn Cox and Peter Martin Nelson, Discarding the Doctrine of Supervisory Domination: New Solutions to an Old Conflict of Interest, 30 Hastings L.J. 763 (1979). Available at: https://repository.uchastings.edu/hastings_law_journal/vol30/iss3/10 This Note is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Hastings Law Journal by an authorized editor of UC Hastings Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact
[email protected]. Discarding the Doctrine of Supervisory Domination: New Solutions to an Old Conflict of Interest By Lynn Cox* Peter Martin Nelson** Introduction Supervisors dual identity in the labor movement, in which they serve both as employees and as employer representatives, poses a per- plexing conflict of interest. Congress has attempted to ameliorate this conflict by denying to supervisors the fights guaranteed to employees2 under the National Labor Relations Act and vesting employers with plenary power to control the union activities of their supervisors. Fre- quently, however, this power remains unexercised as employers acqui- esce in the union membership of their supervisors. The National Labor * A.B., 1976, University of California at Berkeley. Member, Third Year Class. ** B.A., 1976, Williams College. Member, Third Year Class. 1. The National Labor Relations Act § 2(11), 29 U.S.C.