Assignment Instructions/ Description
Questions1. Does the work stoppage by the truck drivers in this case represent an economic strike or an unfairlabor practice strike?2. What is the difference between the reinstatement rights of an unfair labor practice striker and aneconomic striker?
3. Did the employer unlawfully discharge the four truck drivers who never returned to work? Explainyour reasoning.Reference:Holley, W. H., Ross, W. H., & Wolters, R. S. (2017). The labor relations process (11 th Edition).Boston: Cengage Learning.
Instructions: Read the case study and answer the questions. Each question must be a paragrapheach. 2 references are needed for this assignment the book is one which the case study belowis provided from and cited for on last page and a scholarly source is needed as a secondreference.Case Study:Seven of the employer’s 11 concrete truck drivers met several times during the week of September16 to dis- cuss their current wage rates, the lack of a medical insurance plan, and whether theyshould consider joining a union. After meeting with a representative of the national truck drivers’union, four of the seven drivers signed union authorization cards. Employee Santos, one of the cardsigners, wrote a letter that the seven employees presented to the company’s plant manager onFriday, September 20. The letter stated, in part, “Today all employees wish to express a silent strikein pursuance of the right that our salaries be increased to $15.75 per hour. We will not work today ...until an accord is reached.” Later that Friday morning, the company president met with sevenemployees and told them that the company was in no position to give any wage increase; however,steps were already underway to establish a medical insurance plan by the end of the year. The sevenemployees met outside the plant and decided the company’s position was unacceptable. Thecompany president stated that the board of directors would be meeting the following day (Saturday)to con- sider the matter. The seven employees continued their walkout during the rest of Friday. Theboard of directors met on Saturday and calculated the annual cost of the employees’ wage demandto be $308,000. The board of directors found this unacceptable and decided to replace the sevendrivers rather than agree to increase wages. Later on Saturday, the plant manager offered driverpositions to three individuals who already had job applications on file with the company. All threeapplicants accepted the job offer and were scheduled to begin work the following week. On Monday,the seven drivers who had walked out on Fri- day returned to the company but remained outside theplant entrance. Upon learning that the seven drivers had not reported for work at 8 A.M. on Mondaymorning 4. Did the supervisors’ removal of the posted union material and threats to discipline unionmembers for reposting the “Definition of a Scab” constitute an unfair labor practice under the LMRA?Explain your reasoning. but were instead congregating in front of the plant, the company presidentprepared a letter that was given to each of the seven drivers outside the company’s entrance at 9:30on Monday morning. The letter referred to the walkout on the previous Friday and stated in relevantpart: “The circumstances of having abandoned your work without first holding a dialogue, thenbringing later on some demands which we cannot face economically at this time, in addition to yourrefusal to work if your conditions are not met exactly the way [you] stated them, we have to interpretit as a resignation from your job, leaving us without alternatives and unfortunately we have to acceptyour decision effective today, Monday, September 23.” The letter went on to state that the Fri- daywork stoppage forced the company to fill some vacancies and curtail its operations in order torecover in part from the losses it had suffered. After receiving the letters, the seven employees leftthe plant to attend a meeting with a union representative. Sometime later on that Monday, three ofthe employees returned to the plant and requested rein- statement. The company reinstated thethree drivers to their former jobs. The Union filed an unfair labor practice on behalf of the remainingfour truck drivers, alleging that each had been unlawfully discharged in violation of the LMRA, asamended.
Post a Comment