Uploaded August 2026 | Updated September 2026, 2 weeks ago
This summer, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Faster Labor Contracts Act, a bill that would transform how unions and employers negotiate their first agreements. It would impose quick deadlines for negotiations, after which it would send the parties to mediation and eventually binding arbitration, where a panel of arbitrators would hear evidence and write the agreement themselves.
Supporters call the bill a needed corrective to slow, sometimes futile negotiations; opponents say it will destroy the country’s voluntary approach to collective bargaining. Yet despite the elevated rhetoric, the bill has attracted supporters from both sides of the political aisle.
Why has the bill attracted such attention? And why do its supports and critics see it in such stark terms? Our panel of experts will break it down.
Featuring:
Thomas Beck, Member, Federal Service Impasses Panel, Federal Labor Relations Authority
Prof. Sharon Block, Professor of Practice and Executive Director, Center for Labor and a Just Economy, Harvard Law School
G. Roger King, Senior Labor and Employment Counsel, CHRO Association
Daniel Kishi, Senior Policy Advisor, American Compass
(Moderator) Alex MacDonald, Shareholder & Co-Chair of the Workplace Policy Institute, Littler Mendelson P.C.
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
This summer, the U.S. House of Representatives passed the Faster Labor Contracts Act, a bill that would transform how unions and employers negotiate their first agreements. It would impose quick deadlines for negotiations, after which it would send the parties to mediation and eventually binding arbitration, where a panel of arbitrators would hear evidence and write the agreement themselves.
Supporters call the bill a needed corrective to slow, sometimes futile negotiations; opponents say it will destroy the country’s voluntary approach to collective bargaining. Yet despite the elevated rhetoric, the bill has attracted supporters from both sides of the political aisle.
Why has the bill attracted such attention? And why do its supports and critics see it in such stark terms? Our panel of experts will break it down.
Featuring:
Thomas Beck, Member, Federal Service Impasses Panel, Federal Labor Relations Authority
Prof. Sharon Block, Professor of Practice and Executive Director, Center for Labor and a Just Economy, Harvard Law School
G. Roger King, Senior Labor and Employment Counsel, CHRO Association
Daniel Kishi, Senior Policy Advisor, American Compass
(Moderator) Alex MacDonald, Shareholder & Co-Chair of the Workplace Policy Institute, Littler Mendelson P.C.
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.
![This or That - National Student Symposium Edition [Ep.3]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/YDgxCtQdS8M/mqdefault.jpg "This or That - National Student Symposium Edition [Ep.3]
This or that? Student Symposium edition! 🤔
Share your answers with us in the comments!")
![SCOTUS Short: Chatrie v. United States [Opinion]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/YVuR6sP-OXY/mqdefault.jpg "SCOTUS Short: Chatrie v. United States [Opinion]
How much privacy do you have in your location data?
In Chatrie v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that the governments acquisition of Googles geofence location data is a search under the Fourth Amendment.
Watch this SCOTUS Short for a quick breakdown of the case and its implications for digital privacy.")
