InstructionsRead Chapter 10 and Chapter 12 in The Labor Relations Process textbook.Read the Case Study 10-2, “Should the Union Represent Slick Willie Owens” that is located at the end of Chapter 10.Navigate to the threaded discussion and post your answers to the Case Study 10-2 questions directly into the discussion forum. Each case question should be answered in a comprehensive fashion. Opinions and positions should be explained thoroughly and supported by references as much as possible.Provide a detailed post that demonstrates clear, insightful critical thinking. Each response should be 200-300 words in length and is to include a minimum of two sources properly cited and referenced: (a) the textbook, and (b) an academic journal article that is at least 3-5 pages in length and published within the last 3-5 years.Post your initial discussion by the end of the fourth day of the workshop.Also respond to the postings of two classmates with a critical analysis of their answers by the end of the workshop.Your discussion response should discuss your classmate’s posting and be written as if you were reviewing his or her posting in an academic journal. Your discussion response should, therefore, answer the following questions as applicable: Was your classmate’s reasoning articulate and logical? Were the facts correct?Was the interpretation your classmate provided reasonable and consistent with experts in the field? Did your classmate defend the choices effectively?The focus for your critical analysis is not whether or not you agree with your classmate, but how well his/her position was presented.Each response should be 200-300 words in length and is to include a minimum of two sources properly cited and referenced: (a) the textbook, and (b) an academic journal article that is at least 3-5 pages in length and published within the last 3-5 years.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Slick Willie Owens had always claimed himself to be independent, believing that he never had to rely on
anyone else to help him. Willie started out with the Walleye Productions plant in Walleye, Florida as a
laborer 14 years ago and worked his way to a fork lift operator and then to shipping clerk. Back in 2008
during the economic recession, Walleye laid off about one third of its employees; the supervisors
selected employees who would not be laid off. There were many com- plaints among the more senior
employees that the company did not give consideration to their long service with the company, instead,
the supervisors retained the ones they believed to be the hardest workers, many of whom were the
youngest, even some who had just been hired.
In 2009, the word got around that Walleye executives had made a secret trip to Mexico to investigate
having some of the manufacturing done in Mexico. Of course, this information outraged many of the
employees who had worked for the company for many years. Soon afterwards, some of the more senior
employees talked about contacting a union. They contacted the International Union Representative of
the Industrial Union Workers (IUW) who represented employees at another plant in Walleye. The
International Union Representative called for a meeting at the union lodge and about 40 Walleye
employees showed up and signed union authorization cards. Two weeks later the IUW had 150
signatures on the union authorization cards.
The IUW requested to be recognized, but the company denied recognition. The IUW then filed for a
representation election with the NLRB. During the campaign in the late 2011 and early 2012, Slick Willie
continued to claim his independence, that he had made it this far without any union, and that he didnt
need the union now. During the campaign when Willie was approached by co-workers in the shipping
department who supported the union, Willie told them: Even if the union gets in, I dont have to join.
The union still has to represent me. I get everything you guys get, and I dont have to pay them one red
After a lively organizing campaign, the employees voted by 174 to 144 to be represented by the IUW.
Afterwards, the IUW was successful in negotiating a three-year contract in the fall of 2012. The IUW and
Walleye Productions developed a fairly productive, cooperative relationship from the beginning. Both
par- ties have acted professionally in dealing with each other. The company maintained its policy of
going strictly by the rules. The company agreed to the grievance-arbitration procedure and that
discipline must be for just cause. The IUW accepted the companys right to formulate reasonable rules
for employee behavior. One of these formulated rules for employee behavior was: Being under the
influence of illegal drugs and alcohol during working hours will be cause for immediate termination.
On January 1, 2015, Slick Willie attended a New Years party to watch the football bowl games. Willie
was surrounded by his old buddies who were drinking beer and smoking a little marijuana. Willie knew
that he had to report to work the following day but yielded to the temptation when he was offered a
smoke. Since he had been drinking a little too much, Willie smoked a little too much. Knowing Walleye
had a random testing policy, Willie believed that his chances of being tested were slim. Willie was
wrong. Willie was selected to be tested and Willie tested positive. The results were con- firmed and
Willie was terminated by the end of the day.
Willie filed a grievance and claimed that the smoking of marijuana was a single incident, that it was his
first offense, and that he was a long-term employee with a good service record of 14 years. The
companys position was that the rules were reasonable, clear, and communicated to all employees.
Willie had tested positive and the companys position was that it could not make an exception for Willie
because the company would without doubt be faced with similar situations later and not applying the
rule now would have an effect of nullifying the rule.
Willie went to the union to represent him. Willie claimed that the union had a duty to represent all bargaining unit employees and he held a job within the bargaining unit. At the next membership meeting,
there was a backlash among the membership to representing Willie because they remembered what
Willie had said during the organizing campaign and that he has never joined the union. The members
claimed that here is a guy who spoke out against the union, never joined the union, and never paid a
“red dime” to support the union. Now Willie wants the membership to pay the unions attorney to
represent him in arbitration and pay the union’s share of the arbitration, a total amount which could rise
to as much as $5,000. A discussion took place at the meeting and the following proposal was made by a
member: The union would represent Willie in the grievance procedure and arbitration and Willie would
pay for his representation costs, for example, the legal fees, the unions share of the arbitration costs.
The union position was that this proposal as adopted would meet its legal duty of representing Willie.
The membership voted approval without a negative vote.
1. What are Willie’s arguments which will required the union to represent him without paying any
2. What are the union members argument which would require Willie to pay for the costs of
3. Is this adopted proposal fair to Willie? To member of the Union?
4. If the union refuses to represent Willie and pay for the union’s attorney and its share of the
arbitration costs and then Willie files a charge against the union with the NLRB, how will the NLRB rule?
5. If you were a member of the union, how would you have voted on the proposal? Why?
6. If you are a member of management and learn about Willie’s position and the union’s position, what
would you do?
Purchase answer to see full
Delivering a high-quality product at a reasonable price is not enough anymore.
That’s why we have developed 5 beneficial guarantees that will make your experience with our service enjoyable, easy, and safe.
You have to be 100% sure of the quality of your product to give a money-back guarantee. This describes us perfectly. Make sure that this guarantee is totally transparent.Read more
Each paper is composed from scratch, according to your instructions. It is then checked by our plagiarism-detection software. There is no gap where plagiarism could squeeze in.Read more
Thanks to our free revisions, there is no way for you to be unsatisfied. We will work on your paper until you are completely happy with the result.Read more
Your email is safe, as we store it according to international data protection rules. Your bank details are secure, as we use only reliable payment systems.Read more
By sending us your money, you buy the service we provide. Check out our terms and conditions if you prefer business talks to be laid out in official language.Read more