Interfering with the Employee’s Right to Unionize and Resolving Impasse by Binding Arbitration Interfering with the Employee’s Right to Unionize and Resolving Impasse by Binding Arbitration.

Interfering with the Employee’s Right to Unionize and Resolving Impasse by Binding Arbitration
Interfering with the Employee’s Right to Unionize and Resolving Impasse by Binding Arbitration.

Arguably, Fortin was the target of antiunion victimization by her manager because the employer removed a private telephone number and terminated the special van distributions to the clienteles of Metro-Dade County. This led to the reduction in sales thereby creating additional complaints. Moreover, her manager, who wanted to complicate her work life because she was a union enthusiast, singled her out.
Question 2
The court should overrule the supervisor’s decision because even other workers were surprised when they learned that Fortin was being mishandled differently. The union also explained that Fortin went to the warehouse quite often to do other businesses and the manager started to control her movements only after realizing that she was a great follower of the union.
Question 3
Employers still fight unions even after the introduction of National Labor Relations Act because the law prevents them from controlling, confining or coercing workers not to exercise their workplace rights. This implies that they do not have the authority to discipline or lay off workers without following due process.
Questions on page 74 case study
Question 1
The party with the most threat in turning this problem over to another party to handle is the employer. This is because authorization of smoking interfere with his objectives of improving heath, expanding life and lessening the liability of illness and disability.
Question 2
To be fair to both parties, the FSIP should allow smoking but only when a workers are outside their working environment. This would give the workers who are smokers an opportunity to exercise their rights. Moreover, it will also protect non-smokers from being infected.
Question 3
It is a valid distress of the employer that accepting union’s suggestion would taint his image. This is because he acts as an example, protect workers from used smoke, reducing absenteeism and reducing the cost of medical expenses linked with tobacco use. Therefore, he would be solely blamed for anything or injuries that occur within his premises.


 

PLACE THIS ORDER OR A SIMILAR ORDER WITH CAMPUS NURSING PAPERS TODAY AND GET AN AMAZING DISCOUNT



The post Interfering with the Employee’s Right to Unionize and Resolving Impasse by Binding Arbitration Interfering with the Employee’s Right to Unionize and Resolving Impasse by Binding Arbitration. appeared first on Campus Nursing Papers.

I absolutely LOVE this essay writing service. This is perhaps the tenth time I am ordering from them, and they have not failed me not once! My research paper was of excellent quality, as always. You can order essays, discussion, article critique, coursework, projects, case study, term papers, research papers, reaction paper, movie review, research proposal, capstone project, speech/presentation, book report/review, annotated bibliography, and more.

Ask a Question. Get an Answer ASAP!

PLACE YOUR ORDER