Case Study 6-1 Surface Bargaining

Collective bargaining, as its name implies, is achieved when two or more parties come together to make a decision about something. Specifically, it is achieved when employers and a group of employees work together to decide important terms and conditions regarding employment. These terms and conditions include compensation as well as rights and responsibilities of employees, employers, and unions. They can also include guidelines for resolving problems such as grievances and disputes (Budd, 2010, p. 13).

The changes brought up labor unions in the United States over recent history has brought about a movement. This specific movement has shaped the way that employees and workers are treated in the workforce,and how they maintain their quality of life through this employment. Many people think that the labor unions’ influence has created a power struggle between management and union leaders. In many cases this can be considered true, as there have been countless feuds between management teams and labor unions, especially in recent history. In today’s times, on the one hand, some people believe the existence of unions are a necessity in order to ensure and promote employee freedom; while on the other hand some people view labor unions as just another problem in the line of employee success.

Facts: In Davis Supermarkets, Inc. v. National Labor Relations Board 2 F.3d 1162 (DC. Cir. 1993), the Court was asked to decide a dispute between an employer (Davis) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB). The NLRB had found that Davis committed unfair labor practices, which Davis disputed. A union (Local 23) was attempting to organize a local at Davis. Several employees signed authorization cards for the union. Six of those employees were terminated in a mass layoff that impacted eight employees. Davis then fired or constructively fired three more employees who had filed authorization cards. Davis's chairman of the board then informed employees that he wanted them to sign authorizations with the Steelworkers, a competing union. However, Davis maintained that the employees were terminated for cause, not because they signed authorization cards for Local 23.

Two years ago the United Steel Workers organized the 400 workers at Maple Grove Foods, a food processing company in Western Ontario. Previously the company had been in operation for over thirty years as a non-union shop. Management had tried to convince employees not to join the union. The employees were paid quite well, in the view of the company.

Consistent with our bargaining strategy, we would also like to work on building a trusting relationship with management in order to get the most out of integrative bargaining. We can do this over the course of the next several months by holding meetings with them to gauge where their interests lay. Through attitudinal bargaining we can lay the ground work for open and transparent dialogue about our objectives. These bonds increase the likelihood that integrative bargaining will succeed and reduce the likelihood of an

“Employees shall have the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organizations, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing, and to engage in other concerted activities for collective bargaining or other mutual aid and protection”.

After research, the case I have chosen for my law review assignment is, Amanda Hawkins et.al v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc. This case peaks my interest because it occurs in a manufacturing environment with a union presence. This is where the majority of my work experience lies. The four defendants in this case propagate claims of sex-discrimination, retaliation, sexual harassment and a hostile work environment (Amanda Hawkins et.al v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc., 2007). The individual at the center of the allegations was terminated, only to be reinstated by the union after a six month suspension. I understand why unions were created and the need for them at the time. However, it has been my experience that when working in a union environment, an organization’s

Labor Management Relations Act’s goal is to require unions and employers with bargaining relationships to meet with each other and bargain in good faith. Employers have a legal duty to bargain in good faith with their employees' representative and to sign any collective bargaining agreement that has been reached (Walsh, 2013).The National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (NLRA) prescribes the rules for the collective bargaining process. Collective bargaining purpose is to bargain in good faith is an obligation to participate actively in the deliberations so as to indicate a present intention to find a basis for agreement (Cox, 1958). This implies both an open mind and a sincere desire to reach an agreement as well as a sincere effort to reach a common ground.

The Court held an employer could not be compelled by the Act to do so if other channels of communication are available that allows the union to reach the employees, provided that the employer does not discriminate against the union by allowing other distributions. The Supreme Court stated that so long as the circumstances of the employment do not "place the employees beyond the reach of reasonable union efforts to communicate with them," respect for the employer 's property rights allow it to prohibit nonemployee access to its property. In doing so, the Court specifically differentiated the access rights of employees from those of nonemployees. The distinction [between employees and nonemployees] is one of substance. No restriction may be placed on the employees ' right to discuss self-organization among themselves unless the employer can demonstrate that a restriction is necessary to maintain production or discipline. Republic Aviation Corp. v. Labor Board, 324 U.S. 793, 803. But no such obligation is owed nonemployee organizers.” Ted Scott and Sara B. Kalis, Littler Mendelson, P.C.1.

Consequently, negotiation is a process that can be approached in many ways. No matter what strategy we choose, success lies in how well we prepared. The key to negotiating a beneficial outcome is the negotiators’ ability to consider all the elements of the situation carefully and to identify and think through the options. At the same time, negotiators must be able to keep events in perspective and be as fair and honest as circumstance allows. Because a common ground or interest has brought the parties to the negotiating table, a negotiator can benefit by trying to capitalize on this common

Collective bargaining is a process of negotiations between employers and a group of employees aimed at reaching agreements that regulate working conditions. The interests of the employees are commonly

Collective bargaining is the process by which conditions of employment are negotiated between management, and the labor organization representing employees in the bargaining unit. However, “collective bargaining refers to a situation in which union members and officials meet with an intent to resolve any issues or conflicts, in an attempt to maintain relationships” (Holley, Jennings, & Wolters, 2012, p. 243). The collective bargaining process relies on four aspects: recognition of the meeting, meeting with appropriate parties, bargaining in good faith, and incorporating the reached agreement (Adam, 1997). Nevertheless, collective bargaining activities are governed by the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). The NLRA requires bargaining

3. How valid is the company’s argument that the labor agreement with maintenance employees is “beyond the scope of this grievance”?

When entering into contract negotiations, the objective of each side is to obtain a contract of greatest benefit to their organization. This desirable outcome never happens by chance; it is always the result of careful planning. A critical part of this planning is understainding the role of power. This includes determining who possesses the power in bargaining, and establishing strrategies to bargain with individiuals who have more power than you. This power is needed to obtain the advantage in negotiating which will increase the liklihood of obtaining the goal (Lewicki, Saunders & Barry, 2011). Once in the heat of negotiation, it can be too late to try to catch-up on planning which failed to occur before the negotiation process began.

In this paper we will talk about some important qualities a leader can have that will make them ideal for dealing with these kind of situations. We will also discuss some strategies and mitigation efforts that the upper leadership of both the Union and the Corporation can utilize for fair and equal consideration.