Owing in large part to changes in the organi­ zation of work, which now require a greater level of involvement of line employees in work pro­ cesses and aspects of firm decision making, the employer community in recent years has launched

a legislative campaign to relax the strictures of Sec­ tion 8(a)(2). In 1996 the Teamwork for Employees and Managers Act of 1996 (TEAM Act) passed both Houses of Congress but was vetoed by President Clinton. A renewed effort is likely with a change in the administration. The TEAM Act would amend Section 8(a)(2) to permit employers to establish and support committees of supervisors and employees that would “address matters of mutual interest, in­ cluding, but not limited to, issues of quality, pro­ ductivity, efficiency, and safety and health. . . .” Such committees, under the proposal, could not claim or seek authority as exclusive bargaining rep­ resentatives or negotiate collective agreements. In the union-represented sector, presumably they could not be established prior to bargaining with the union. The proposal faced considerable op­ position from the labor movement (and its friends in Congress), who charged that it would bring back the “company union” abuses of the 1930s.