Source: law/R5-NLRA.md
# Round 5 — employer unfair-labor-practice re-audit Scope: 29 U.S.C. §158(a), with provisions that qualify those employer routes. This is an author repair record, not QA2 approval. The source corpus is read-only. ## Concrete repairs - Added the complete §8(a)(2) working-hours conference proviso rather than quoting only its permissive tail. Board-rule qualification remains operative. - Added the complete §8(a)(3) union-security provisos and named ordinary waiting, representation/rescission, equal-membership and financial-only safeguards. The latter two are negative conditions on employer justification: the employer cannot rely on security when it has the specified disqualifying reasonable grounds. - Added §8(f)'s full conditional construction-agreement allowance and connected it to the affected (a)(2)/(3) formulas. Its seven-day/majority/referral/qualification alternatives do not immunize unrelated discrimination; final (a)(3) safeguards and representation-petition provisos remain intact. Section164(b) state limits remain cross-references, not invented §158 source quotes. - Added Marquez's actual financial-core interpretation as a verified case rule. Membership text does not authorize compelled full membership or all non-germane union spending over objection. - Added explicit employee coverage and §8(d) status qualifications. The peer audit caught the need for Mastro Plastics: the sixty-day status-loss consequence does not reach a strike solely protesting employer unfair labor practices rather than contract termination/modification. That judicial qualification is external-source annotation; no unavailable local Supreme Court quote pointer was invented. - Anchored the complete bargaining definition, contract-notice duties and healthcare modifications. The refusal node and children now represent alternative breaches of applicable employer duties. They do not require every bargaining case to involve an existing contract or healthcare institution. Union and FMCS notice/communication duties are contextual; only applicable employer duties can supply an employer breach. - Anchored the full §8(c) expression/evidence protection and added scope constraints for speech and the judge/Board-made insignia defense. Protected speech is not a license for independent discriminatory acts; special circumstances is not a general defense to all unfair labor practices. ## Source checks and pin review Read the canonical §158 text through its (a), (c), (d), (f), (g) clauses and their conditions. The [current OLRC §158](https://uscode.house.gov/us/usc/t29/s158/) reports currency through PL119-138 (2026-11-03). The [NLRB official Act](https://www.nlrb.gov/guidance/key-reference-materials/national-labor-relations-act) confirms the incorporated employer/employee definitions. These checks do not replace the pinned IR source or turn cross-reference annotations into machine-verified quotes. Reopened original pin contexts: Hendrickson speech prediction, Ingredion direct dealing and derivative liability, Novato/Erickson motivating-factor and same-decision analysis, In-N-Out insignia justification, and Bozzuto interrogation. No wrong-case identity or party argument masquerading as a holding was found; circuit/date limits are retained. New Marquez v. Screen Actors Guild, 525 U.S.33 (1998), `/us/525/0033-01`, read local text3000..5100: its General Motors/Beck explanation supports the financial-core pin. The [official Mastro Plastics report](https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USREPORTS-350/pdf/USREPORTS-350-270.pdf), 350 U.S.270,284–289, supplies the qualified status-loss construction. Root fetch timed out once; the official indexed holding and independent peer's full opinion reading confirmed the limitation. It is not automatically generalized to mixed-purpose or healthcare §8(g) strikes. ## Retained weak spots - Not an exhaustive theory of assistance versus cooperation, protected concerted activity, Board-participation retaliation, inherently destructive discrimination, successor bargaining, impasse, information disclosure or waiver. - Construction prehire recognition/withdrawal and its relationship to §9(a) majority status require further case-specific doctrine. The new exception concerns the enumerated agreement features; it is not a complete construction bargaining model. - Healthcare notice exceptions, mixed-purpose strikes, and current Board insignia/ work-rule changes require controlling-authority analysis. The quoted 2018 rule is not asserted as a comprehensive current national test. - §8(b)/(e) union/secondary-boycott offenses and remedial §10 proceedings remain outside this employer (a) catalogue. Claim formulas are descriptive, not a legal decision engine or proof that every cross-sectional qualification is exhausted. ## Verification All sixteen previous IDs are retained; 36 statutory anchors and nine case rules verify with zero errors. A bounded author-separated peer pass identified and then confirmed correction of the Mastro Plastics and notice-duty-structure issues. CASE quote/ID verification and the complete database reload belong to the integration checkpoint. Final independent QA2 review remains outstanding.