A Union Demanding Recognition
This case study deals with a union demanding recognition and bargaining rights within the company. “Bargaining is the process of cajoling, debating, discussing, and threatening in order to bring about a favorable agreement for those represented.” (Ivancevich, 2010) In this case those who were a part of the union felt like they were being interrogated. On several occasions Larry Melton was asking workers if they knew about the meeting that went on. Melton wanted to know who arranged for the union organizer to come. When Melton talked to the other workers he would tell them to let him know if they found out any other information, not to sign anything, and not to talk to the organizer if approached by them. Some of the workers felt threatened. When Melton spoke with George Thompson he was telling him that either he was on Melton’s side or own his own. I would feel slightly threatened if someone I worked with told me that. On December 24 Larry was terminated. Once this was done the workers who were being interrogated and threatened should no longer have felt that way with Leo Nord taking over. The company looked at this case from a different standpoint. The company did not know about the workers being interrogated and threatened. The statement that George Thompson gave about Melton threatening him was vague and inconclusive; meaning that his statement was not well put together. The information he gave was unclear and open to doubt. So even if Melton did threaten George Thompson, it could not be proven to the company through his statement. The union said that they were promised medical services if they did not join the union. But the company was already working on adding in other medical services because it was a part of the company’s annual review. The benefit change was announced during the Christmas season. The union felt like they had been influenced by Melton during the election. The company pointed out the fact that he was terminated over a month before the elections took place and that the union should have been able to make up their own minds about the things being elected. The company’s arguments are persuasive. The union’s arguments are also persuasive. I feel that the company’s arguments are most persuasive.
On the day of the representational election, Leo Nord made a statement about the employer taking the rent-free apartments away from the janitors’ helpers and charging the head janitors for the second bathroom in their apartments if the union won the election. Because