NM Stat § 50-2-1 (2021)
2021 New Mexico Statutes|Chapter 50 - Employment Law|Article 2 - Corrupt and Coercive Practices|Section 50-2-1 - Findings and policies.

A. Findings. Hearings conducted by the McClellan committee of the United States senate, without reflecting upon the aims or integrity of the vast majority of employers and labor unions have disclosed collusive, coercive and corrupt practices indulged in by a small minority of irresponsible employers and leaders of labor unions. These practices, which shock the conscience of our citizens and are deplored by all right thinking people, have been tolerated and encouraged by the absence of appropriate statutory prohibitions and declared governmental policy. New Mexico, on the threshold of its greatest era of economic development, for the welfare and protection of its citizens, should by statute eliminate those practices which are so destructive to good employee-employer relationships, and which in many cases have been shown to have resulted in a denial of the civil liberties of many persons. The legislature finds that the coercive and collusive practices prohibited herein represent a serious menace to the peace, safety, morals and welfare of the people of this state. The elimination of such practices by affording effective relief therefrom is a necessary condition to the realization of personal freedom for the employee, the encouragement of employee representation according to the free will of the employees and for their greater welfare, and the protection of the public interest generally. B. Public Policy. An [In] interpretation and the application of this act [50-2-1 to 50-2-3 NMSA 1978], it is hereby declared to be the public policy of this state to mitigate and eliminate certain coercive and collusive practices of labor organizations and employers with the view of promoting and protecting the exercise by employees of the fullest possible freedom with respect to self-organization, choice of bargaining representative, collective bargaining and all other legitimate concerted activities, it being fully recognized by the legislature that employees should have an equal freedom to refrain from any such activity or activities except to the extent that such freedom may be limited by a valid agreement in writing requiring membership in a labor organization as a condition of employment. History: 1953 Comp., § 59-13-1, enacted by Laws 1959, ch. 26, § 1. ANNOTATIONSProtection of right. — A mandamus proceeding against the governor to recognize a statutory or constitutional right of petitioners to organize and collectively bargain under this section or N.M. Const., art. II, §§ 4 and 18, does not meet the criteria for an exercise of original jurisdiction in mandamus by the supreme court. State ex rel. AFSCME v. Johnson, 1999-NMSC-031, 128 N.M. 481, 994 P.2d 727. Inapplicable to public employer-employee relations. — State statutes regulating labor relations in private industry, such as this section, are not applicable to public employer-employee relations. 1963 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 63-52. Acceptable collective bargaining agreement provisions. — Institutions of higher learning may enter into collective bargaining agreements which contain provisions for settlements of disputes by way of compulsory arbitration. 1974 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 74-03. Institutions of higher learning may legally enter into collective bargaining agreements which provide for modified agency shop and dues check-off system. 1974 Op. Att'y Gen. No. 74-03. Am. Jur. 2d, A.L.R. and C.J.S. references. — 48 Am. Jur. 2d Labor and Labor Relations § 657 et seq. Union security arrangements in state public employment, 95 A.L.R.3d 1102. Modern status of rule that employer may discharge at-will employee for any reason, 12 A.L.R.4th 544, 32 A.L.R.4th 1221, 33 A.L.R.4th 120. Procedural rights of union members in union disciplinary proceedings - modern state cases, 79 A.L.R.4th 941. Effectiveness of employer's disclaimer of representations in personnel manual or employee handbook altering at-will employment relationship, 17 A.L.R.5th 1. Effect of First Amendment on jurisdiction of national labor relations board over labor disputes involving employer operated by religious entity, 63 A.L.R. Fed. 831. Prohibition or limitation on display of signs by employees as unfair labor practice, 86 A.L.R. Fed. 321. Recording of collective bargaining or grievance proceeding as unfair labor practice, 86 A.L.R. Fed. 844. When is subsequent business operation bound by existing collective bargaining agreement between labor union and predecessor employer, 88 A.L.R. Fed. 89. Requirements for obtaining court approval of rejection of collective bargaining agreement by debtor in possession or trustee in bankruptcy under 11 USC § 1113(b) and (c), 89 A.L.R. Fed. 299. Suits by union members against union officers under 29 USCS § 501(b), 114 A.L.R. Fed. 417. Increase, or promise of increase, or withholding of increase, of wages as unfair labor practice under national labor relations act, 137 A.L.R. Fed. 333. "Mass discharge" of employees as evidence of unfair labor practice under §§ 8 (a)(1) and (3) of National Labor Relations Act (29 USCS § 158 (a)(1), (3)), 137 A.L.R. Fed. 445. Job placement of returning strikers as unfair labor practice under § 8(a) of National Labor Relations Act (29 USCA § 158(a)), 145 A.L.R. Fed. 619.