Russell A. Smith

Public employment: A neglected area of research and training in labor relations

The problems presented by the labor relations of public employment are unique, and they are of increasing importance, not only to those directly concerned, but to the general public. It is the thesis of this article that these problems present a proper area of research and training at the university level, concerning which the colleges and universities of the country have neglected their full responsibilities. We use the term public employment in its usual sense, as referring to direct employment by a public agency--federal, state, or local. We suggest, however, that in addition there are types of quasi-public employment, such as by contractors building or operating publicly owned facilities (for example, the missile-site installations at Cape Canaveral and the Atomic Energy Commissions production facilities) which involve difficult problems not found in purely private employment. These problems, although different in many respects from those of direct public employment, are both unique and of special public concern, and could appropriately be encompassed by our thesis. (Authors abstract courtesy EBSCO.)

The Relation of Federal and State Securities Laws

State Blue Sky laws antedated by more than twenty years the Securities Act of I933 and the Securities Exchange Act of I934. At the time of the passage of those Acts every state but one had on its statute books legislation relating to the sale of securities. The entrance of the federal government upon the field did not result in a repeal of any of the state laws. Such laws remain extant and their administration has, if anything, received renewed vitality from the prevailing public interest in the regulation of transactions in securities. It is pertinent to examine briefly into the scope of the federal and state laws, to determine the extent to which they are concurrently applicable, and to ascertain the need, if any, for correlation of the regulatory functions of the federal and state governments. State Blue Sky laws differ widely, evincing a lack of uniformity both in objective and in means for attaining similar objectives. It is apparently the policy of some states, as disclosed by their statutes, the administration thereof, or both, not only to prevent fraud by requiring factual disclosures and establishing penalties for misrepresentation and deceit, but also to prevent the sale of certain securities (on the theory, perhaps, that they are unsound or per se fraudulent) or the sale of any securities on terms not considered fair.t Other states, less paternalistic in this respect,