Minority Rights and the Exclusivity Principle: Conflict under the NLRA
OF THE UNITED STATES 249 (94th ed. 1971). 14. 419 F.2d at 221. 15. See Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 177 (1967); Miranda Fuel Co., 140 N.L.R.B. 181, 47 L.R.R.M. 2178 (1962), enforcement denied, 326 F.2d (2d Cir. 1963). These decisions have stood for the proposition that a union acting as exclusive bargaining agent for its members had a statutory duty to fairly represent all employees. A failure of this duty can result in an unfair labor practice. [Vol. 14 EXCLUSIVITY DOCTRINE ficials are elected from within their own ranks. They are usually long-standing members whose success is measured by their ability to best represent the needs of their fellow members. If they fail to do so they will lose the next election; this is the essence of a democratic system. The majority of a union that elects its officials and representatives is justified in believing that these officials will keep the majority's interest in mind when dealing with union matters. If a minority group is pursuing a goal of more jobs for minorities, the interests of the majority are involved. More jobs for minorities invariably mean fewer jobs for the ma-