-
1. Public Policy and Labor Law
- Southern Illinois University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
3 ThisbookisaboutU.S.transportationlaborlaw andthepublicpolicydecisionsthatshapedit.As is true with many abstract concepts, no single, widely accepted definition of the term public policy exists. The term public has many connotations , depending on context and perspective. The term public is relative, and as Miles’ Law states, “Where you stand depends upon where you sit.”1 In the context of policy initiatives as used throughout this book, the term public relates to the government. Astandarddictionarydefinitionfortheterm policy is“adefinitecourseofaction,adoptedasa guidingprincipleorprocedurethatisconsidered expedient, prudent, advantageous, etc.”2 Thomas R. Dye, professor of political science, defines public policy as “whatever governments choose to do or not to do.”3 Thus, since it refers to the actions of government and the goals and values that determine those actions, public policy can be considered “an intentional course of action (or inaction) followed by the government.”4 Transportation Policy The role of transportation is so vital to society in general and to commerce in particular that governmentshavealwaystreateditasaspecialindus try , one that is particularly affected by the public interest. The famous Supreme Court case Munn v.Illinois,94U.S.113(1877),establishedtheright ofthestateintheabsenceofcongressionalregulation to regulate business enterprises that provide 1. Public Policy and Labor Law essentialpublicservices.Inwritingforthemajority ,ChiefJusticeMorrisonWaitecitedacommon propertylawprinciplethatwasovertwohundred years old: “Property does become clothed with a publicinterestwhenusedinamannertomakeit publicconsequence,andaffectthecommunityat large. When therefore, one devotes his property toauseinwhichthepublichasaninterest,he,in effect, grants to the public an interest in that use, and must submit to be controlled by the public for the common good.”5 Munnv.Illinoisestablishedtheconstitutionalityofstategovernmentregulationofprivateenter prise . However, a few years later, in the 1886 case ofWabash,St.Louis,&PacificRailroadCompany v. Illinois (118 U.S. 557), the U.S. Supreme Court madearulingthatseverelylimitedthestates’rights tocontrolinterstatecommerce.KnownastheWabashcase ,theCourthadtodecidewhethertheindividualstateshavethepowertoregulaterailroad rates for interstate shipments. The final decision by the Court stated the commerce clause of the Constitution does not permit individual states the right to regulate railroad rates on the parts of interstate journeys that fall within their borders .6 WithWabash,theCourtbarredstatesfrom regulatinginterstatecommerce,assertingthatonly the federal government could do so and, thereby, overturning its 1877 decision in Munn v. Illinois, which allowed states to regulate railroads. As a result of this Court decision, Congress passed the Interstate Commerce Act in 1887, 4 Foundations of Labor Law and Policy which created the Interstate Commerce Commission , the first true federal regulatory agency. It was designed to address the issues of railroad abuse and price discrimination. The creation of this commission signaled the movement of the U.S.governmenttonationallyassumeresponsibilityforeconomicaffairs ,whichwaspreviously delegated to the states.7 Transportation is not only important to the national economy; it is also vital for national defense. This national-defense linkage caused virtually every developed country in the world except the United States to develop publicly owned-and-operated systems of railroads and airlines. Thus, employees of these nationalized transport industries are government employees and fall under their nation’s civil service labor laws.Severalofthesenationshavenowprivatized theirtransportationsystems,andothersarenow seekingtodoso,addingcomplexitytotheglobal transportation labor relations equation. Adheringtothephilosophyofcapitalismand private enterprise, the United States has always had privately owned railroad and airline industries (with the exception of Amtrak). Because of the unique relationship between transportationandthepublicinterest ,theU.S.government worked on the principle that it was necessary to pursue different public policy initiatives in thetransportationsectorthanthosefollowedin othersectorsoftheeconomy.Whenevergovernment decides to undertake a new public policy directiveoralteranexistingone,itfrequentlydoes sothroughthelegislativeprocessbyenactingstatutes designed to accomplish its goals. In general, transportation policy can be grouped into two broadcategories:developmental(subsidy)policy initiatives and regulatory policy initiatives. Developmental Policy Initiatives The federal government has long followed a policy of subsidizing transportation activities to achieve certain national goals and objectives. Public subsidization of the private transportation sector has been justified on the grounds that an efficient rail and air transportation system is an “essential public good” and is “critical to national defense.” The essentially private transportation sector has been viewed by the federal government as being in the same class as a pure public good such that when produced, it is available to all citizens without restriction. It isthis“publicgood”philosophythathasalsoled to federal subsidization of the nation’s system of airports and airways. Figure 1.1. Morrison Waite, chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court when it heard Munn v. Illinois (1877), a case involving corporate rates and agriculture. Ira Munn, a partner in a Chicago warehouse firm, had been found guilty of violating state laws providing for the fixing of maximum charges for grain storage; in his appeal, Munn contended that the fixing of maximum rates constituted a taking of property without due process of law. The Waite court upheld the granger laws, which established as...